High cervix?

[smeep]

I have a friend who was induced at 40 weeks due to "low fluid levels" (I put it in parentheses because what warrants induction is relative to each individual healthcare provider). She was later told that her cervix was higher than most women's and that she would probably never have gone into labour on her own, and probably won't with future children. She's considering an out-of-hospital birth, and really wants a drug-free birth this time (the pit was horrible last time so she caved and got the epi). How true is what she was told? If it does make spontaneous labour impossible or unlikely, what non-drug options are there?

[khaoskat]

DS1 was born at 42 w 5 d, with accurate dating. When I went in to the hospital in labor, I had been dialated to 2 cm for weeks. I sat with pit from 8:00 p.m. day 1 - 4:00 p.m. day 2 (they upped the dose like every 15 mins after 6:00 a.m. day 2) and they broke my water around 6:00 am day 2 and made almost no progress. I didn't progress in labor until I was forced into an epi. I went from 2 cm to fully dialated in around 2 hours. This was after having undergone cervical ripening a few weeks prior with no sucess.

DS2 was born at 42 w. My first cervical check was at 40 w 3 d, and I was 2 cm dialated. 1 week later I was 4 cm dialated. I walked around 4 cm for almost 3 days, and labor hit on its own.

DD1 was born at 40 w 2 d. Never had a cervical check until I showed up in labor --- by the time I got there I was 10 cm, but went down to a 9 due to having labor stopped with Mag. Sulphate.

Melissa S.

[pamamidwife]

omg. this is just ridiculous. another reason why women should avoid doctors for their normal births.

the baby gets pushed down with uterine contractions and the cervix gets pulled up over the baby's head at the same time to open it. How far up the cervix is has NOTHING to do with physiology.

once again, a woman's body is blamed for something that is the fault of the provider.

bah! she should definitely research an out-of-hospital birth this time...and let go of the idea that her body caused this.

[doctorjen]

Definitely a bunch of crap. It doesn't even make physiologic sense. The cervix is at the bottom of uterus - in everybody. Where it is at the end of pregnancy has to do with several things - how low in the pelvis the baby is, is one factor. More importantly, in most women at the end of pregnancy, the cervix is still tipped toward the back as the uterus is tipped forward. It is not until well into labor that the cervix slides more towards the front, and the baby comes lower in the pelvix making the cervix more reachable. At times, the head of the baby will be low in the pelvis, but the cervix is not very dilated yet or effaced yet, and then you have to reach around the baby's head to find the cervix pointing toward mama's back. I've seen many a provider mistakenly think this represents a problem, because the cervix is difficult to reach, when really, it just indicates the baby is low in the pelvis and the cervix still posterior, or tipped back as is normal.
Anyway, none of these things have a thing to do with going into labor on your own. You can have a closed, long, high cervix and go into labor an hour later. The only thing that cervical exam is useful for is predicting the success of an induction, not a labor, so inducing with an unfavorable cervix merely makes the chances of that not succeeding higher - but it doesn't mean a thing about when spontaneous labor might have occurred, or how it would have progressed.

[Shelsi]

Just anecdotal experience here but my cervix was high up until the day I had my dd. I had a 4 hour super easy labor with her.

[courtenay_e]

Geeze. Everything everybody else said...plus. We are all formed a bit differently physiologically. For instance, I have what our family fondly calls "Monkey Arms." My arms are significantly longer than the "average" woman's arms. Who in god's name is to say that one woman might just not have a longer distance from the opening of the yoni to the top of the vaginal vault or to where the cervix is? Just like my sister has beautiful long fingers, and my cousin has legs that just go on forever and ever?

How in the WORLD could that cause her to not give birth on her own?! The things these people come UP with to have the opportunity to induce or cut. *sigh*

[smeep]

Thanks everyone!

[bryonyvaughn]

Rabbit trail warning...

Originally Posted by courtenay_e

Geeze. Everything everybody else said...plus. We are all formed a bit differently physiologically. For instance, I have what our family fondly calls "Monkey Arms." My arms are significantly longer than the "average" woman's arms...

OMG, what a wonderful characteristic for the childbearing woman! You could even be at term and cook at the stove with two hands at a time. At six months I have to stand sideways and cook one handed on the back burners. I'll have to remove the child guard from the front of the stove and still be cooking "side saddle" when I'm near term.

~BV