or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › Birth and Beyond › How common are 42+ week babies?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

How common are 42+ week babies? - Page 2

post #21 of 51
My second was born at 42weeks +2 days past her EDD. No induction, no nothin. My midwives also gave me a more lenient date, which helped avoid the NST nurses. They also tried to pin me down for an induction date when I went in and were non plussed when I refused.
post #22 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rico'sAlice View Post




Seriously? I have got to read about that? Any links?
How big was it? Were they sure about conception dates?
I've heard of several 10mo babies (like Oliver Hudson) but never 12 months. Awesome.
It's in Husband-Coached Childbirth by Robert Bradley, MD
post #23 of 51
I was born 3 weeks past my due date, according to my mother. Back in those days (almost 30 years ago! nobody even mentioned induction -- although my mom tells me she did try eating spicy food and driving on bumpy roads she's so cute.

I agree that PEOPLE (not medical people, just like aquaintances and such) start getting crazed around 39w, "Have you had the baby yet? But you're due in 6 days, why isn't it here yet?!?!?!" My best friend gestates for 41-42w with all of her babies, and lies to everyone (but me) about her edd.

ETA: I read somewhere about an Australian doc who had clients up to 48w. Here is a link to gentlebirth.org info about postdates.
post #24 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by NaturalCatholicMam View Post
I have a friend (born about 1969) who was a month late, and Dr. Bradley says he had a patient go a full 12 months of pregnancy, safely.
Jackie Chan was in the womb for 12 months - he was 12 pounds when he was born
I love it when I can use a useless fact
post #25 of 51
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by aeiouys View Post
Jackie Chan was in the womb for 12 months - he was 12 pounds when he was born
I love it when I can use a useless fact
I just read this as well, I cant find sources for it exactly but it appears he was told so as fact his entire life. I was trying to find longest gestation since I was reading that so long as the baby stays active, and the mother does not opt to induce, it could go on for a very long time


....it would just figure if my baby's one that needs to cook for an entire year!
post #26 of 51
Mylee was born at home at 42weeks 1day

No induction.
post #27 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by arlecchina View Post

amusement points: one of my family members who's not spoken a word to me since learning I was pregnant emailed me to ask what my doctor though about it going on still. I replied I didnt know; I dont see one.

no response to that

I also get a kick out of responding to people asking me what my doctor says about being "late" or how long my doctor will "let" me go. I tell them that I don't see a doctor, and that my midwives won't do anything but wait for me to go into labor on my own. I must be bad, because I really enjoy seeing the confused looks!
post #28 of 51
post #29 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qalliope View Post
Whoa!
post #30 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrunchyBikerMama View Post
I also get a kick out of responding to people asking me what my doctor says about being "late" or how long my doctor will "let" me go. I tell them that I don't see a doctor, and that my midwives won't do anything but wait for me to go into labor on my own. I must be bad, because I really enjoy seeing the confused looks!
I love it when strangers ask when you are due and you get to say, "2 weeks ago." They will literally take 2 steps back, like the baby is gonna fall out right there . When asked when my mw thinks things will happen I tell them, 'Shes not psychic.'
post #31 of 51
Dd1 was born 2 weeks exactly after her due date, induction and all the unnecessary interventions included. Funny, she is my smallest baby. She was 8-3. 14hour labor,I really think she was showing no signs of coming out. I had no braxton-hicks or anything. Ahh, she would have come out eventually though.

Dd2 was 10 days past her due date. She was spontaneous labor no interventions. 5 hour labor. She was 10-8.

dd3 was 9 days late, spontaneous labor was about 2 hours....no interventions. She was 9-14.

I think I would have waited them all out if I knew then what I know now.
post #32 of 51
I do def think people go over 42 weeks.

However another thing to consider is if the pregnancy is actually dated correctly. Unless you chart, use OPKs (which aren't always accurate either), or are getting ultrasounds just before you ovulate you're not going to know your exact date of ovulation/conception.

Even people with regular cycles don't necessarily ovulate on day 14. day 14 is just an average. A typical luteal phase (time between ovulation and your period) is 10-16 days I believe. So you can still have a regular 28 day cycle but ovulate on day 18 instead. Well, now your due date using your LMP is 4 days earlier than it should. Not a huge deal usually but with an doc pushing for induction it can be.

I have long cycles. I don't ovulate until day 26 and that's on a good cycle So with this current pregnancy I am due July 25th using my ovulation date to date the pregnancy (medically speaking you are 2 weeks pregnant the day you ovulate). If a provider were to use my LMP I would be due on July 13th...almost a 2 week difference! So using the LMP date I could easily go to "44 weeks" even though really I'd only be 42 weeks.

What I'm saying is you have to take into consideration how accurate the dating is to begin with.
post #33 of 51
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shelsi View Post
However another thing to consider is if the pregnancy is actually dated correctly. Unless you chart, use OPKs (which aren't always accurate either), or are getting ultrasounds just before you ovulate you're not going to know your exact date of ovulation/conception.

actually I know the date of conception, but of course that doesnt take into account the fact that sperm can live inside the body for a few days (up to nine I read somewhere) so that could be it, just because I am certain of the day doesnt mean the actual conception necessarily happened at that moment! (as in, if I didnt actually ovulate that day, it coulda been two days later, who knows?)

I'm not worried about going over. I just heard all that FUD about how second babies are not usually late etc, but then that poll in the other thread someone started seems to imply that isnt true either
post #34 of 51
My first was 42+4 and I was charting and used OPKs. At 18 days over I still was not dilated or effaced and handn't dropped so there is no telling how long I would have gone. I was induced at that point due to low fluid and non reactive NST.

My 2nd came on his own at 42 weeks. Time will tell with my third .
post #35 of 51
Quote:
I got some journal articles with my Bradley class discussing that outcomes are not overall better when you induce at 42wks, mostly b/c of the complications that come with induction, but I can't remember the facts - it was a mainstream journal.
If you could find those and post them here, i would really appreciate it. I have done quite a bit of research on the topic and have not found anything to support that. In fact, research does support induction at 41 weeks unfortunately. Research shows that induction at 41 weeks reduces perinatal death, c-section rate, and meconium staining. I agree that it isn't a one size fits all type of thing, I myself signed an AMA because I wouldn't agree to induction just before 42 weeks last time. I don't agree that all babies come when they are ready though. Some babies stay in too long and there can be serious consequences to that. Anyway, on the induction thing:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...&dopt=Abstract

http://acogjnl.highwire.org/cgi/cont...act/101/6/1312

http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/...24/1587?ck=nck

http://www.acog.org/from_home/public...ng14458fla.htm

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...&dopt=Abstract
post #36 of 51
My first was 4 days over.
My second was 7 days over.
My third was 11 days over.

Same doctor for all. Knew I was quite disinterested in induction. At 40 weeks, he broached the subject, recommending I consider induction if baby hadn't arrived by 41 weeks. At last pre-natal appointment (2 days before birth, so 41 weeks, 2 days) he recommended we really start seriously thinking/planning for an induction by 42 weeks if babe hadn't arrived.

I asked why. I appreciate that he was honest enough to say, "Because we just don't know much about what happens after that. Is that a good reason? Probably not."

I told him that wasn't a good enough answer for us. Obviously, things didn't actually "come to a head" at 42-weeks because baby arrived two days later at 40wk +11days. But I am quite certain doc would have gone longer than 42 weeks with continued close monitoring, having said his bit and found we disagreed. Not sure how long for, though. I think he would have been plenty concerned/revisiting induction quite actively by 43 weeks.
post #37 of 51
My first was born a few days after 42 weeks, my second was born right at 42 weeks and my third was born like 2 days before 42 weeks.. All was induced with pitocin.. My OBGYN lets you go to 42 weeks before inducing then they start bugging ya..

This time I am not getting induced so we will see how far I go.. Thank God for home birth!!
post #38 of 51
Quote:
I appreciate that he was honest enough to say, "Because we just don't know much about what happens after that. Is that a good reason? Probably not."
Um, that is not honestly, that is just ignorance. Post dates has been studied quite extensively and the risks of stillbirth goes up with each of the later weeks of gestation and more steeply after 41, 42 and 43 weeks. In addition, the risk of meconium staining and need for c-section goes up sharply as well. Pretty scary that an OB wouldn't know that, yikes!
post #39 of 51

41 week limit at my birth center

I found out recently that at my birth center (Roosevelt Hospital NYC) there is a strict cut off date at 41 weeks. I find this to be a shame, considering the center was founded by midwives. They also have a 6 page list of other reasons why you may not be able to use the birth center. Its getting harder to have the delivery I want in NYC!
post #40 of 51
Quote:
It's a bell curve - most go between x & y dates, with a smattering early and a smattering later. If we see people having babies at 30wks, we shouldn't be shocked to see them having them at 50wks.

People do not have healthy, normal babies at 30 weeks. People give birth at 30 weeks because something went WRONG. And, the baby usually has problems, needs to be in the NICU, can't breastfeed right away, etc., etc/

I am hightly skeptical of the 12 month gestations...highly, highly skeptical. I think more likely what happened was either the dates were way off, or there was a missed, reabsorbed m/c and the woman got pregnant again. Even that TIME article posted, sounded very much like what happened was a reabsorbed m/c and then a subsequent pregnancy. The evidence as presented by Dr. Beltz: a laboratory test indicated pregnancy last March 24. The date of Mrs. Hunter's last menstrual period was Feb. 10. Everything proceeded as usual for three months. Then there was "apparent cessation of growth," until at six months Mrs. Hunter felt life for the first time. (Normal time for this: 16th to 18th week.) Fetal heartbeat was first detected in September. (Normal time for this would have been July.)

But, asked the skeptics, if gestation went on so long, why did Penny Diana weigh only 6 lb. 15 oz.?

How anyone can think that was a twelve month prengnacy is beyond me. Babies don't just stop growing and developing for a 3 months? It just doesn't happen.

I can believe that a healthy prengancy can go to 42 or 43...*maybe* even 44 weeks, but to say that a 12 month pregnancy can be normal, is pretty ridiculous. There is NOT that much variation in what is "normal'. It is more likely that people were very off on the dates...even these 45 or 46 week pregnancies....someone could easily ovulate at 40 days instead of 14..so a what looks to be a 45 week prengancy, is really only a 42 week prengancy.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Birth and Beyond
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › Birth and Beyond › How common are 42+ week babies?