*Update* UCing (but DH not happy), need info on twin births and/or Polyhydranmios - Page 3

[MeepyCat]

ITA with Adaline's Mama, BlessedJess.  My DD was born at 32.5 weeks gestation, but bigger then your boy by nearly a pound.  She needed pretty hard core assistance with breathing to make it through her first few days.  You were extremely fortunate.

My last pregnancy was high-stress and high-risk, and I've suffered from clinical anxiety for most of my adult life on top of that, but I found that having information, and having ways to get more information, seriously reduced my stress levels.  As long as I didn't have information, I could theorize endlessly about what might be wrong.  My ultrasounds put a stop to that by ruling out a large number of the more frightening possibilities.  There was a pretty solid chance that my problem (placenta previa) would resolve itself, rendering all my worry pointless, but being able to plan for what would happen if the problem didn't go away helped me feel much calmer and more in control. 

I understand the appeal of UC in some situations, but I don't feel that it's a fair thing to do to a partner who feels uncomfortable with the responsibility.  In the event of an emergency, he'd have to choose whether to immediately help you or immediately help the baby - for a lot of people, this is the kind of terrifying personal choice that leads to paralysis rather then action.  I think you need to make a plan that works with his limitations.  He's been commendably honest in telling you what those limitations are, it would be wrong to attempt to override his knowledge of his self.

[homemademomma]

Originally Posted by BlessedJess 

I think you are thinking only of the risks set up by the U/S waves. I was thinking in more broad terms like misdiagnoses or raised alarms that then require further tests and traumatizing worries over nothing. That concerns me even more.

For myself, last time U/S would have opened up a can of worms I didn't need. For one thing, he was very unusually small. His placenta was well below the tenth percentile range. So was he. He was born at 36 weeks weighing only 3.5 pounds. Coupled with the marginal cord insertion, (I also believe they would have measured lower than usual fluid levels) and perhaps a misdiagnosed worry thrown in for good measure I would have been subjected to the kinds of stresses that no pregnancy needs if you want a good outcome. Research shows that maternal stress in late pregnancy is linked to worse outcomes. Meanwhile, he's going to be triple his birth weight next week and he's only just turned 3 months old. He's healthy and has never seen the inside of a hospital or had supplemental feeds to boost weight gain.

No, I definitely understand and have experienced first hand the risks related to misdiagnoses or raised alarms.  However, when there are clear indications that there might be a problem, the risk/benefit ratio comes down squarely on the side of seeking more information. It just does; plain math. 

What would you do if your healthy, 35 yo husband started having chest pains? Would you wait it out, knowing that most chest pain is non-cardiac in origin? Or would you seek further diagnostics to rule out the possibility of a major problem, knowing that morbidity/mortality related to an MI increases with each passing minute?  This is exactly.the.same.thing. 

Also, your birth story is alarming.  I would hesitate to use it as a pro-UC example, because IUGR, in addition to causing chronic hypoxia during pregnancy, can also cause acute and emergent fetal distress during labor which may only be picked up through auscultation or EFM.  I am glad he is okay, and I hope he continues to develop normally and does not experience any of the long term effects of growth restriction or oxygen deprivation.

 I am sure you were monitoring your blood pressure during your pregnancy and watching for signs of GDM and anemia, because as you know, those and other controllable factors can cause IUGR. 

I hope my post is not construed as anti-UC. Because I am 100% pro a woman's right to choose the manner and place in which she gives birth.

[Adaline'sMama]

Originally Posted by homemademomma 

I hope my post is not construed as anti-UC. Because I am 100% pro a woman's right to choose the manner and place in which she gives birth.

I am too. A woman should choose responsibly, and if her partner is saying he isnt comfortable with it then he likely isnt going to be too keen on hauling her to the hospital while holding a baby if something happens like PPH.

OP, I didnt have any dangerous amount of blood loss this time, but we had a baby in distress and I was too dizzy to walk. I was bleeding more than I had with my past two births. That would have totally freaked my DH out and he would have been too panicked to drive safely to the hospital (and dd wouldve had to go to the hospital.) The other option would have been to call an ambulance, which would have added a lot more stress to the situation. You're right, the second twin is more likely to have problems than the first. IMO, my baby B had more problems than her sister because A got a good squeeze, and I was already pretty wide open by the time B came out. She didnt get all the fluid out. There are lots of people who uc twins, lots of people who do a homebirth with twins, and lots of people who go to full term with twins. And then there are lots of people like me, whose twins are born at 35 weeks and spend 10 days (or more) in the NICU. I think that even if you and your DH do plan to uc, you should probably think pretty hard about a backup plan and some prenatal care because all kinds of unpredictable things can happen and most twins do come early. (the average gestation being 35 weeks). Just consider it.

Getting prenatal care is not terrible. Unlike what some of the previous posters have alluded to, you can always say "no." Just because a doctor tells you that you have to do something, doesnt mean you have to do it. So, the only "risks" in getting prenatal care (other than potential ultrasound risks) is the "risk" that a doctor might tell you something that makes you change your mind.

I think that when you have a partner, you have to listen to what he is comfortable with. After all, he will be there and have to deal with the aftermath of whatever happens. 

[zapzipzee]

Originally Posted by Adaline'sMama 

Originally Posted by homemademomma 

I hope my post is not construed as anti-UC. Because I am 100% pro a woman's right to choose the manner and place in which she gives birth.

I am too. A woman should choose responsibly, and if her partner is saying he isnt comfortable with it then he likely isnt going to be too keen on hauling her to the hospital while holding a baby if something happens like PPH.

OP, I didnt have any dangerous amount of blood loss this time, but we had a baby in distress and I was too dizzy to walk. I was bleeding more than I had with my past two births. That would have totally freaked my DH out and he would have been too panicked to drive safely to the hospital (and dd wouldve had to go to the hospital.) The other option would have been to call an ambulance, which would have added a lot more stress to the situation. You're right, the second twin is more likely to have problems than the first. IMO, my baby B had more problems than her sister because A got a good squeeze, and I was already pretty wide open by the time B came out. She didnt get all the fluid out. There are lots of people who uc twins, lots of people who do a homebirth with twins, and lots of people who go to full term with twins. And then there are lots of people like me, whose twins are born at 35 weeks and spend 10 days (or more) in the NICU. I think that even if you and your DH do plan to uc, you should probably think pretty hard about a backup plan and some prenatal care because all kinds of unpredictable things can happen and most twins do come early. (the average gestation being 35 weeks). Just consider it.

Getting prenatal care is not terrible. Unlike what some of the previous posters have alluded to, you can always say "no." Just because a doctor tells you that you have to do something, doesnt mean you have to do it. So, the only "risks" in getting prenatal care (other than potential ultrasound risks) is the "risk" that a doctor might tell you something that makes you change your mind.

I think that when you have a partner, you have to listen to what he is comfortable with. After all, he will be there and have to deal with the aftermath of whatever happens. 

I just dont understand why he was totally fine with UP/UC for our daughter, and this baby, up until the point we got a midwife!!!!  We've had her for less than half the pregnancy, had a consult and ONE appointment, and when I want to go back to our original plan, he's against it.  

Every time I've tried to talk to him about it, he gives me a different reason... first being that I was just "up and changing our plans without discussing with him" when I started the conversation as that I didn't THINK I wanted her there.  A couple weeks passed, and I was more sure that I DIDN'T want her there.  He then decided that I was going to bleed to death and he would be stuck raising three kids by himself.  Well, he risks his life every third day, going in burning buildings, to save people's belongings, and that's ok because he has life insurance so I'll be fine?  I see that as much more "life threatening" than childbirth.  People weren't designed to go in burning buildings.  Women ARE designed to give birth!  His latest reason is that we just "used" the midwife and it's unfair to her.  She's getting her money, so I dont consider that to be "using" her.  His reasons for suddenly not wanting to UC just dont make sense to me, and he refuses to discuss them with me, just tells me and walks off.

If the baby comes prior to 36 weeks, we would most definitely be going to the hospital, midwife or no midwife.  And I dont KNOW I'm having twins, so see no reason to do anything other than prepare for the slight possibility at this point (brewers diet, water intake, rest, vitamins/minerals, reading up on multiple births, etc...)  I've also been preparing for polyhydranmios, but the more I read about that, the less I think that is what is going on, since it occurs towards the end of pregnancies, not the middle....

[BlessedJess]

Originally Posted by Adaline'sMama 

Wow, that must have been a huge surprise since you were sure there were twins and suspected triplets.

Its amazing that he's never had to go to the hospital. Most moms of babies in the three pound range arent so lucky. Usually babies that small and early have temperature problems, feeding issues, and jaundice- at the minimum.  I sat skin to skin with my 3 lb 15 ozer for hours in my 90 degree house and couldnt get her temp above 96 and had to take her to the nicu to join her sister, who was there for fluid in her lungs.

I had enough experience by then that I thought that the babies would be small. I always had small babies before 6 pounds down to 5 pounds - and I was guessing 4 pounds. I am 4'11" and my husband is only half a foot taller. We were both unimpressively small 6 and 7 pounders ourselves. Because I thought there were two (I sure gained for 2! 48 pounds and I only lost 5 at the birthday.) I thought that I could expect a small baby, reasonably. But because there were two heartbeats still going strong when we checked with doppler midway the placentas were formed already when he became a solo pregnancy and I'm sure that is the explanation for his small .8 pound placenta. I continued to push the nutrition into myself and had been really determined to eat well for twins even after the rapid growth stopped. (I measured a net loss of size at 26 weeks of 13 cm - right or wrong - and then started growing again less rapidly weekly from there) It was a situation where the placenta was stressed while forming, I believe, and then by 18 weeks I had figured out what I lacked nutritionally but by then the placentas had stopped formation. The diet was nutrient dense even before I corrected the magnesium shortfall but afterwards it only got better. That's why it was frustrating for me but also expected. By the end of the pregnancy I couldn't find a second baby but wanted to believe it was still there. At 26 weeks I had already talked myself out of suspecting there were triplets.

Because I'm so small but packed on as much nutrition as I could - I'm sure that's why it was okay for him to be at home. That and he was very healthy. I had a 37 week 5 pounder who wasn't as robust. Neither required intervention though. Because he's so small it convinces me he must have had a buddy or two at some point.

[BlessedJess]

His temps were great but we kept him on skin and well covered all the time. Plus he was amazing at nursing and blew me away. I was expecting to have to fight for his nutrition but he was quite able to fend for himself as long as I planted the nipple in his hungry little mouth and my colostrum was plentiful and then my milk came quickly. A new experience for me. Usually it takes 4 days to come in. Also the milk was rich for the first 3 months. More so than I remember ever before. And there was a little jaundice but it was gone by the end of the week. It was amazing to me. I was willing to take him in the day he was born if it was needed.

[BlessedJess]

Originally Posted by MeepyCat 

ITA with Adaline's Mama, BlessedJess.  My DD was born at 32.5 weeks gestation, but bigger then your boy by nearly a pound.  She needed pretty hard core assistance with breathing to make it through her first few days.  You were extremely fortunate.

My last pregnancy was high-stress and high-risk, and I've suffered from clinical anxiety for most of my adult life on top of that, but I found that having information, and having ways to get more information, seriously reduced my stress levels.  As long as I didn't have information, I could theorize endlessly about what might be wrong.  My ultrasounds put a stop to that by ruling out a large number of the more frightening possibilities.  There was a pretty solid chance that my problem (placenta previa) would resolve itself, rendering all my worry pointless, but being able to plan for what would happen if the problem didn't go away helped me feel much calmer and more in control. 

I understand the appeal of UC in some situations, but I don't feel that it's a fair thing to do to a partner who feels uncomfortable with the responsibility.  In the event of an emergency, he'd have to choose whether to immediately help you or immediately help the baby - for a lot of people, this is the kind of terrifying personal choice that leads to paralysis rather then action.  I think you need to make a plan that works with his limitations.  He's been commendably honest in telling you what those limitations are, it would be wrong to attempt to override his knowledge of his self.

I would not birth a 32.5 week gestation at home unless I had no other option. Not even a 33.5 weeker. 35-36 weeks are the limit for me and then only under certain circumstances. Being prepared to transport if needed. I had a basis for my fortune, and plenty of reasons to believe I was making the right choice for us.

[BlessedJess]

Originally Posted by homemademomma 

No, I definitely understand and have experienced first hand the risks related to misdiagnoses or raised alarms.  However, when there are clear indications that there might be a problem, the risk/benefit ratio comes down squarely on the side of seeking more information. It just does; plain math. 

What would you do if your healthy, 35 yo husband started having chest pains? Would you wait it out, knowing that most chest pain is non-cardiac in origin? Or would you seek further diagnostics to rule out the possibility of a major problem, knowing that morbidity/mortality related to an MI increases with each passing minute?  This is exactly.the.same.thing. 

Also, your birth story is alarming.  I would hesitate to use it as a pro-UC example, because IUGR, in addition to causing chronic hypoxia during pregnancy, can also cause acute and emergent fetal distress during labor which may only be picked up through auscultation or EFM.  I am glad he is okay, and I hope he continues to develop normally and does not experience any of the long term effects of growth restriction or oxygen deprivation.

 I am sure you were monitoring your blood pressure during your pregnancy and watching for signs of GDM and anemia, because as you know, those and other controllable factors can cause IUGR. 

I hope my post is not construed as anti-UC. Because I am 100% pro a woman's right to choose the manner and place in which she gives birth.

My risks of U/S included possibly witnessing a failed fetus or two die, raising panic alarms over Mike where they would have tried to force premature delivery well before he chose to come, forced c-section, possibly forced drug testing due to the severe "IUGR", baby living in a NICU  for months, etc.

My husband did have exactly that issue. He chose to go to the hospital the first time it happened. Once he figured out what caused it, he could stay home if he chose, the next time. Chest pains can have multiple causes. The trick is paying attention to the symptoms and evaluating the risks on a dynamic basis during each episode.

"Also, your birth story is alarming.  I would hesitate to use it as a pro-UC example"

Not to me, because he was just fine, and still is. The point is, we avoided much harm. We needed nothing from them at that point. If we ever do need help we know where to go.

"I am glad he is okay, and I hope he continues to develop normally and does not experience any of the long term effects of growth restriction or oxygen deprivation."

So far he has exceeded our expectations. He's about to triple his birth weight by 15 weeks old. He makes emotional talking-like sounds at us and plays, laughs, smiles. Loves to stand up with help, has great head control, that kind of thing. No colic, great digestion. Better digestion than my other kids. Maybe the good digestion is because I take taurine in my morning coffee. ;-) I didn't sleep much as a baby but he sleeps well. I think he may be a morning type person. He certainly wakes up in a great mood.

"I am sure you were monitoring your blood pressure during your pregnancy and watching for signs of GDM and anemia, because as you know, those and other controllable factors can cause IUGR."

You bet I did. I wish I would have caught the magnesium problems sooner. That's my biggest regret. If I had, I might have 2 or 3 babies now. As it is, I feel indebted to my husband who heard the other heartbeat with me. He still grieves that there aren't twins. That's the hardest thing. He was so sure. I tried to brace him for the other alternative but it was too late once he heard the heartbeats. He didn't give up on there being maybe another for more than a week after the first was born. Part of that is because a friend of my family was a twin who's brother was born on a different month and I looked pregnant after I gave birth. :-(

[BlessedJess]

Originally Posted by Adaline'sMama 

Getting prenatal care is not terrible. Unlike what some of the previous posters have alluded to, you can always say "no." Just because a doctor tells you that you have to do something, doesnt mean you have to do it. So, the only "risks" in getting prenatal care (other than potential ultrasound risks) is the "risk" that a doctor might tell you something that makes you change your mind.

I think that when you have a partner, you have to listen to what he is comfortable with. After all, he will be there and have to deal with the aftermath of whatever happens. 

You can't always say no. I wish. But people I know and others on the web who tested that theory would disagree. Every situation is different. Court orders have been given for c-sections before.

[zapzipzee]

Originally Posted by BlessedJess 

Originally Posted by Adaline'sMama 

Getting prenatal care is not terrible. Unlike what some of the previous posters have alluded to, you can always say "no." Just because a doctor tells you that you have to do something, doesnt mean you have to do it. So, the only "risks" in getting prenatal care (other than potential ultrasound risks) is the "risk" that a doctor might tell you something that makes you change your mind.

I think that when you have a partner, you have to listen to what he is comfortable with. After all, he will be there and have to deal with the aftermath of whatever happens. 

You can't always say no. I wish. But people I know and others on the web who tested that theory would disagree. Every situation is different. Court orders have been given for c-sections before.

I have said no before, to a drug while in labor with DD, only to find out later that I received it.  DH knew some of the things they were doing in the hopsital were wrong, but he just stood by and let them do it.  Which is exactly why I dont want the midwife...  she can tell me she's not going to manipulate, coherse, or lie to me all she wants before the birth, but when it comes right down to it, she can do whatever she pleases during the birth, some things with out even justifying them or asking ahead of time.  I dont want to worry about what she's going to try to pull, or what I'm going to have to fight with her over, while I'm in labor.

[A_Random_Phrase]

Originally Posted by Alenushka 

It is your choice of course, but you need to think of your husband career as well. Check your state laws as he can be held liable for providing care outside his professional scope of practice. All  it takes, is one DA who is sticker to the letter of the law to treat your DH as Paramedic and not a husband who happened to be a paramedic during a birth emergency.

I am wondering why you keep posting here? Are you unaware that this forum is a uc support section of Mothering? You seem very fearful and medically inclined. I think you would feel more comfortable in another area of Mothering. Though I am sure you mean well, your fear-mongering is a bit irritating (forgive me if things changed farther down the thread. I read this far and had to comment).

[A_Random_Phrase]

Originally Posted by R1Jenny 

What I hate is what you won't find is the unsuccessful stories because here they tend to be deleted.  Nothing like skewing the odds in favor of what you support.

Seriously this whole situation could be made a lot better if you just went and got an U/S to see whats going on, are you having twins, is there something wrong.

I was watching this slide show earlier today. Most of them are twins - most of them are home birth - all but one set born vaginally. There are even a set of triplets.

http://www.pregnancy-and-giving-birth.com/birth-video.html

I have read many twin birth stories (unassisted) and I don't see what the fear is all about. Is there a risk in birthing? Yes. There are also risks in driving a vehicle, in eating fish, in taking a shower, and tremendous risks in going to a doctor or hospital. Shall we all hide in a cave, then? Afraid of everything and anything?

[A_Random_Phrase]

Originally Posted by Cynthia Mosher 

R1Jenny, your advice to get a U/S to make sure there are no problems is a reasonable post here in the Unassisted Childbirth forum. Regarding your other statement, unsuccessful stories have been deleted in the past at the request of the member who posted her story. This usually occurs not because she does not want her story to be known but because she found it being linked to and/or copied and posted about elsewhere in a very negative, attacking and accusative manner, something that would not be acceptable here at Mothering, no matter what the cause of loss. We always respect the wishes of such a member and remove her story to protect her, not to uphold a "UC at all costs" agenda. 

A reminder of our forum guidelines:

Based on this I am removing posting privileges of the members who have posted to this thread in a manner that is not supportive or interest in exploring UC or advising zapzipzee's how to get the support she needs from her husband and that will help her have a safe UC. 

Thank you. I know that when I was pregnant, I was very sensitive to other people's fear-mongering. The op may not be, but I do think it is unfair to bombard her with fear-bombs and accusations.