Lets talk about the 42nd week of pregnancy - Page 2

[Jyotsna]

The reason I posted this thread to begin with is because I am doing some postpartum care for a mom who chose to give birth via c-section in her 38th week. When I talked to them about their baby being premature, they said, NO, she is only 5 days early. She had heavy vernix, hair all over her entire body, and gosh, after three hours in the nursery, she latched on and nursed lazily, and a couple more times, but then hardly nursed at all. When I left the first day, I thought nursing was a go, even though it was taking a long time. The next morning, the mother told me that her doctor said the baby's billirubins were too high, and her weight was too low, so she told her NOT to breastfeed, but rather bottle feed. The doc also said that she should bottle feed every three hours. I feed my babies every 2 hours, and I am just shocked that the doc would say that. In fact, one of my babies nursed every 1 hours for the first few days I had her.
My clients baby is looking week, skin is loose, and I am so concerned, I had a dream in the middle of the night on Thursday night that the baby was in danger, and felt I must help the mom move to feeding more often. I am so tired right now that I am not saying all that is on my mind, so forgive me. But I really believe that the baby having been born at week 38, just can't breastfeed, and has had a very dangerous start. I am so angry I want to bite something. And this family is having such a difficult time caring for this little baby, under too much stress and I have never seen anything like this.

Finally, after getting more comfortable with the mom, I asked her why she didn't want a vaginal birth (she called me 1 week before the scheduled c-section) and she told me that she was afraid of having a painful vaginal birth. She made this face which looked as tho she would never forget this pain.

I can't work with clients like this in the future. I think I will draw up a natural vaginal birth contract with future clients, that I will only support a c-section in the event that the mom has an emergency.

About her being in the nursery, the baby was kept from her while she was being sewn up, cleaned up and recovered, and then later the nursing staff kept saying they were doing this or that with the baby, but actually it wouldn't take three damn hours to do these things, but lead my clients (who are from India) to believe they were working on the baby the entire time she was in their care.

Finally, I pushed the dad to go and get the baby, and finally they brought her out. I nearly cried at the sight of a baby who was born from her mothers body, but didn't SEE her mom for the first three hours after birth. I can't even type anymore, I am so upset.

[Peppamint]

We had a client who we thought was 42 weeks... she went into labor and that baby came out looking 38 weeks, 39 weeks at the most. Definitely not a 42 weeker. Can you imagine if she'd been induced two weeks ago?

[malibusunny]

I was due June 2 and gave birth on the 22nd-- I went into labour on the day I would have been induced. Everyone I said "forty two week" to looked at me like I was insane.

[holly6737]

Not to mention the fact that the Dr.'s change the due date throughout the pregnancy to match ultrasound readings. With my first, Noah, we started at a due date in the first week of July and ended at June 24st because of ultrasound readings. That was before I knew anything.

[Full Heart]

Genetic play a big roll as well. Some women just carry to 42+ weeks. Like me. You think its just coincidence that I was born at 43 weeks and all 7 of my kids were born at 42+ weeks? I think not. Imagine if I had been induced that first time and continued to be for every pg. I would certianly think there was something wrong with me that I couldn't produce a child in the correct time frame. I know alot of women who have had more than 1 "late" pg feel this way. Of course blame the womans body, we all know it doesn't work right : .

[mom2tillie]

First off, I am not a birth professional. (but I would like to be one someday)

My comment here is that many of the older women I have talked to frequently tell stories about their children going 43+ weeks gestation. This was, ofcourse, years ago. They commonly refer to this as "3+ weeks late" and when I was pregnant with my DD I just thought that they were all nuts and they had incorrectly estimated their due dates. How could that be when my OB was talking about induction at 41.5 weeks?

I am sure many due dates are calculated inaccurately but that being the case wouldn't it be more prudent to wait rather than induce early?

I am so much smarter now. I couldn't wait to get induced with DD, luckily I went into labor on my own and she was big and healthy. After my DH and I saw some of the tiny ones born in the hospital while we were there we vowed that we would never entertain the thought of induction again.

Which brings me to question, actually. My midwife recommends using EPO at 37 weeks. This won't cause labor to begin earlier than my DS is ready, will it?

I am sure she wouldn't steer me wrong, but I gotta' ask anyway. What are the real benefits of EPO? (I'll make a new thread)...

-Iris, hoping for another big, healthy "past-due" baby!

[Peppamint]

EPO is used to soften the cervix... before using it, I would personally check your own cervix if you are able. I've always been mushy and effacing by 37 weeks so there would have been no point in my shoving capsules up there.

If you are not effacing/dialating, your cervix will feel firm like the tip of your nose. If your cervix is softening (and it may be effacing/dialating too), it will feel soft like your lips.

[queen_anne78]

I am not a birth professional but found this thread not only interesting but it hits home to me.. My daughter was born 10 days "late" and everyone thought I was NUTS...She was almost 10 lbs (I am a pretty thin person) so everyone always gasps when I "didn't have a c-section!!" and that I had her at home with a midwife. I need to get better about saying that she wasn't 10 days late. I need to probably be saying something like, "10 days postdue, or maybe 10 days after EDD". Semantics matter.

Here's the thing. We've been to a lot of specialists in the last few months for her torticollis and for a slight weakness on her right side. The last place we went, a neurologist, said he believes she may have had a stroke while she was in-utero. He felt this might explain the weakness, and also why she is developementally a bit behind (which he said is rather unusual, since babies born past 40 weeks seem to be a little ahead developmentally on average). My thoughts are that THANK GOD I waited until SHE was ready to come out. What if she needed those extra 10 days to finish healing from that stroke??? What if I had stayed with one of the OB's I was with and they induced right after my EDD and she wasn't ready b/c of the stroke??

Size wise, I guess she would have been fine if she had been born earlier, she was a big girl, but IF she did have a stroke, I am glad she had the time she needed to get ready to be born, and I am glad my midwife trusts birth and the research enough to know that babe will come out when babe is ready. I feel like there's just so much we still don't know about what babies in the womb are doing to prepare to be born and if we start messing with that...no good.