Did each labor get faster for you?

[Celticqueen]

I'm curious about what my chances are that this birth will be just as quick or quicker than my last 2. 

First child: 7 hour labor

Second child: 1 hour labor

Both started with the water breaking on its own, then contractions started 24 hours later, so I am only counting "labor" to be from the time pain started until the baby was out. 

The second baby was especially startling considering how quick it was. The water birth center was 20 minutes away, and it seems like I barely made it there after ctx kicked in...

What is your experience?

My midwife is convinced that I'm going to have another super quick one. I can't complain! But I wonder how likely it is...

It'd be nice to look at the statistics of multiple labors per woman but I can't find that info for some reason. The only way to really know will be to just see for myself what happens, but I can't help but be curious!

[Magali]

Both of my labors were long.  The first one was augmented with pitocin and was about 16 hours.  My second was about 24 hours, no pitocin.  So, it hasn't been my experience.  I am always in awe of women who have short labors.  It blows my mind.

[AfricanQueen99]

I have yet to have a Braxton-Hicks so I count labor from my first contraction to babe on my chest.  Both kids pretty much flew out the second my water broke (OB punctured with my first, baby punctured with my second).

1st - 12 hours

2nd - 3 hours

I seriously wonder if this next kid is just going to fly out at first contraction (I'm hoping!) - although I have logistical concerns about dealing with the current two if I have another quick labor and my old man happens to be at work.

[Sweet.Bee]

I'm curious about this, too. My first labor was just over 2 hours, so officially a "precipitous labor". According to this site, a previous precipitous labor is a risk factor for having another.

I wonder if people have found this to be true, though.

[Just1More]

Yep.

My first was 12 hours (but I was on my back at the hospital, and she was posterior.  I wasn't allowed to eat or move around at all.  So, still pretty fast considering....).

I do have bh, and it's hard to tell the real thing from early labor.  No change happens at all...I always start labor completely at zero, very little effaced. 

So, from the first "painful contraction" to birth:

My second was 30 minutes.  I had about 2 hours before that that I thought were early, early labor.  I could completely ignore them, talk through them, etc.  Nothing to tell me something was about to happen (other than that I checked and found myself at 5 cm!)

My third, I woke up at 2, and was sure it was labor at 5:30.  She was born at 8.  So 2.5 hours.  Again, if I hadn't checked, I would have thought they were just more bh and I should drink more water.  Only the last hour was anything to remotely pay attention to. 

My fourth I had a stalled labor.  I went from zero to four in four contractions and 30 minutes....and then it stopped until the kids went to bed that night.  I was a little uncomfortable around 6, and started noticing contractions more around 7.  Nothing I had to pay attention to until 9 or so, and she was born at 9:45.

Since the beginning of my labors are so blurry to me, I'd say mine are about 2 to 3 hours.  My midwife said that firsts are slow, seconds are fast, and the third is unpredictable.  She said that after that your labor pattern is mostly set.  I hope so. :)  I'm working on baby 5 now. 

[UnassistedMomma]

Mine have each gotten longer.  I'm really, really hoping for something much faster than the 42 & 41 hour labors I had with my last two babes!

[AfricanQueen99]

Originally Posted by Sweet.Bee 

I'm curious about this, too. My first labor was just over 2 hours, so officially a "precipitous labor". According to this site, a previous precipitous labor is a risk factor for having another.

I wonder if people have found this to be true, though.

Thanks for the link. That was my second labor - contractions on top of each other that I couldn't wrap my mind around. I also had a severe tear (my labia was literally hanging on by a thread). Interestingly enough, that kid was 8.12 at birth so not small by any means, there was no IV/pitocin and I've never touched cocaine in my life.

I do hope #3 is quick, but I'd like to be more emotionally present for that birth.

[vivica2]

my first was 23 hours,

my second was 6 hours. 

[Snowflake777]

1st was 24 hours.

2nd was around 2.5 hours (not including weeks of prodromal contractions).

I'm a little worried that next time could be even faster.

[Snugglebugmom]

First was 44 hours, second 18 hours, third 9 hours. I figure by the 6th kid, I should be at the point where I think:"Hey, is my labor starting?" after which I will proceed to push out my baby. 

[Mizelenius]

Hmm . . .I always have a hard time counting actual labor, but overall, I'd say they were more or less the same, maybe a little faster each time.

The last time was the best.  Easy but regular cx at 6:30, water broke (never happened to me before) at 7:30, and born by 8:30.  I never felt transition, either.  Just so tired of being pregnant that I decided I'd just GET HER OUT. 

Hospital people were surprised when I walked in and could talk w/o issue, and was 8 cm, then baby was born 20 minutes later.  I hope I am as lucky this time.

[Celticqueen]

Interesting responses!! I'm so hoping for another fast one. Although it's hard to imagine faster than an hour  That hour went by SOOOO quickly. Before I knew it, the baby was in my arms and I asked myself "How the eff did that just happen?" 

The weird thing is though that I don't understand...I've always heard that it's hereditery. That if you have quick labors, most likely your mother did, etc. Was that true for you? My mom had LONG labors with all 5 of us...ranging anywhere from 20, 30, 40 hour labors. So for me, it's not true at all

[Just1More]

Yes, my mom and sister both had quick labors.  My grandma and two aunts, however, did not.  My midwife said that you are more likely to labor like your sister than like your mom.

[Sweet.Bee]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mizelenius 

I never felt transition, either.

This is probably going to sound stupid, but what is this "transition" people keep talking about? It's supposed to hurt more? My labor started out with really strong contractions and stayed about the same throughout. At some point, my body started pushing, but the pain was the same as before.

In any case, I'm hoping for another short labor b/c I am a wimp when it comes to pain.

P.S.  vivica! How are you feeling?

[samstress]

i honestly think that there's no rhyme or reason when it comes to such things.  while my second was indeed quicker than my first (just under five hours compared to 28 hours), i had naively thought #2 would come sooner.  my first came on her due date, so i was sure my second would come on his due date (if not sooner).  nope, he was two weeks late.

i really believe every pregnancy, every labor, every birth and every baby are truly unique and as soon as you think you're going to have a certain kind of experience, you end up with something very different. 

just my nickel minus three.  :)

[Mizelenius]

With the first three, it was a period where the intensity increased by a lot.  With each of them, it only lasted minutes but felt much longer.  Then, it was time to push. The first time pushing I felt amazing (so much better than I had during transition), the next time (2nd baby) pushing was still intense but very quick . . .the third time the baby just about fell out (almost did not make it from the shower to the bed :), and the last time, it was all on my terms since, like I said, I was done being PG and just wanted her out, so no transition, etc.

I am guessing you will have another short labor!

Originally Posted by Sweet.Bee 

Quote:

This is probably going to sound stupid, but what is this "transition" people keep talking about? It's supposed to hurt more? My labor started out with really strong contractions and stayed about the same throughout. At some point, my body started pushing, but the pain was the same as before.

In any case, I'm hoping for another short labor b/c I am a wimp when it comes to pain.

P.S.  vivica! How are you feeling?

[Mizelenius]

My mom and I have fast labors.  My mom (this was back in the 70s) wanted an all natural birth, but once, just as she was about to push, they gave her a spinal w/o her consent.  She was mad!

My sister's labors are longer . . .they may be more intense, too.  She always gets an epidural.  Seems like she is in so much pain the baby does not descend fully until she's relaxed, and then it's fine.  So far, I have never wanted or needed an epi.  My labors are fast and manageable.

Originally Posted by Celticqueen 

Interesting responses!! I'm so hoping for another fast one. Although it's hard to imagine faster than an hour  That hour went by SOOOO quickly. Before I knew it, the baby was in my arms and I asked myself "How the eff did that just happen?" 

The weird thing is though that I don't understand...I've always heard that it's hereditery. That if you have quick labors, most likely your mother did, etc. Was that true for you? My mom had LONG labors with all 5 of us...ranging anywhere from 20, 30, 40 hour labors. So for me, it's not true at all

[Celticqueen]

Originally Posted by Sweet.Bee 

Quote:

This is probably going to sound stupid, but what is this "transition" people keep talking about? It's supposed to hurt more? My labor started out with really strong contractions and stayed about the same throughout. At some point, my body started pushing, but the pain was the same as before.

Yeah I'm with you too...For both labors (first was pitocin, second was natural ctx) felt the same in "severity" from the moment I had them. The only difference is that they became more frequent. Maybe that's what people are referring to in terms of pain. The more frequent, the more painful. But yeah, my last one was so short it was really hard to differentiate any of the "phases of labor". I got in the tub at the birth center and suddenly found myself pushing. My husband yelled to my midwife "Wait, she JUST STARTED LABOR. It's not time to push yet is it?" 

[Plummeting]

Originally Posted by Celticqueen 

The only difference is that they became more frequent. Maybe that's what people are referring to in terms of pain. The more frequent, the more painful.

No. These are adult women, and I'm quite sure that when we say "more painful" we mean "more painful". "More intense" is ambiguous, but when we say that transition is more painful, that's what we mean - it isn't something we imagine because the contractions are closer together. It isn't that way for everyone, but for some of us, transition was MUCH more painful than the first 8 centimeters, and NOT just because the contractions were closer together, but because they HURT MORE.

I had one labor that lasted 4 hours and 50 minutes and one that lasted 52 minutes, if you count from first real contraction. My first labor, the longer one, was very, very manageable until I reached transition. Then, the level of pain easily tripled or quadrupled. Contractions were more frequent, but as an adult woman, I know the difference between more frequent and more painful, and more frequent doesn't mean more painful, they just happen to coincide during transition for many, many women. My second labor lasted 52 minutes from the first contraction that actually hurt to baby in arms. My water broke an hour before the first real contraction and I had a few very minor contractions before that, but I didn't know I was in labor until I hit that 52 minute time frame. I actually do NOT want another labor like that. I found it intensely more painful than the first, I believe it's part of the reason she had a sticky shoulder (I don't think she or I had time to get in a good position for birth), and I seriously hope this baby takes a little longer to make its exit.

[josie423]

Nope! All three labors have been 12 hours almost to the minute.