baby not engaged

[homemademomma]

we have a client who is a primip, 40+ weeks, and has been doing pre-labor type stuff for 2 days, but her baby's head is still really high, not really in the pelvis at all. u/s said baby was about 8lb but we all know how acc. they are. nak so im not gonna go into other stuff but curious what yall think

[cathicog]

Is the baby's hr and movements fine, and mom's bp, urine, temps, etc? Maybe her dates are off...I tell the clients to subtract 3 months and add 7 days to thier LMP, that is assuming they weren't pg already, or nursing with no menses, especially if mom is nursing a toddler, and hasnt' had her period yet, or was on the pill(or other hormonal bc),she may not know when she ovulated. The original date could be 2 or 3 weeks off....

[homemademomma]

i dont think the issue is that her dates are off. i think the issue is that the baby is not engaged in the pelvis. usually in 1st time moms baby engages well before labor begins. mom and babes VS are fine. maybe the baby is asynclitic, or maybe she has some pelvic issue, or something. . . . i dont know.

[flapjack]

Gut instinct would be to say that it's just not time yet: also at a guess, probably a long baby. My eldest was transverse until 38 weeks, head didn't engage until 42 (with lots and lots of pre-labour type activity, which was my body working really hard to line him up right) and he was born at 43.5. Weighed in at 14lb 2oz (which everybody missed through scans and palpation- the midwife swore when she weighed him), but was 24 inches long- head was on the 40th centile, so this wasn't the problem: it seems the length was.
This time, again, I'm having lots and lots of pre-labour, and we know the baby is smaller than either of my boys: Isaac was 8lb 13 oz, but only 19 inches long and was born at 38 weeks, no pre-labour worth mentioning. Ultrasound estimates this baby is between 7-8lbs, I'm having weeks of pre-labour, baby isn't engaged yet and if this baby measures in at less than 21 or 22 inches I'll eat my hat. No-one looks at the length of the baby in relation to fetal positioning but especially with short mums, I think it's more significant than anyone gives it credit for and it needs to be looked at in more detail.
The pre-labour is her body's way of nudging baby into line: if she can visualise it as a positive, and something that is bringing that baby closer to her, step-by-step, then it will help. Worrying won't achieve anything at this point, being post-mythical-figurative-date is stressful enough anyhow.

[KC in KS]

I didn't get engagement until active labor

I went from prelabor to active labor without any interruption, so it's a little hard for me to tell you when DD engaged. I do know that I had regular contrax every five minutes for 30 hours before I got to 3 cm as was declared officially "in labor". And at that point, DD still hadn't engaged. My OB said that wasn't at all unusual in a first birth.

BTW, I did nothing to bring on labor, except get a little "friendly" with DH. So it's not that baby "wasn't ready yet".

[fuzzypeach]

My dd did not engage until well after I went into labor. I think she was posterior, and I also had tons of prelabor. I was 7-8cm when I arrived at the hospital, still not engaged, then my water broke and the nurse made sure her head came to be against the cervix, not the cord, and it was all good after that.

[MamaFern]

my son ( my 1st) also didnt engage till active labour started..