Is NO bed rest possible? - Page 2 - Mothering Forums

Reply
 
Thread Tools
#31 of 35 Old 06-08-2004, 04:41 PM
 
Ravin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Atenveldt
Posts: 5,848
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
My mom went to 38 1/2 weeks w/ my sisters, which was better than the barely 36 she went w/ me. And she was never on bedrest.

Of course, this was 25 years ago in rural Idaho. The doctor wasn't sure it was twins (and didn't tell my mother it was or could be) until 3 days before they were born. It wasn't until then that he was sure he was hearing 2 heartbeats. This was in pre-ultrasound days, of course.

breastfeeding, babywearing, homeschooling Heathen parent to my little Wanderer, 7 1/2 , and baby Elf-stone, 3/11!

Ravin is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#32 of 35 Old 06-18-2004, 10:11 PM
 
Periwinkle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 8,530
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I was on bedrest from 28-32 weeks with "preterm labor" (though, like Lex, without cervical change - in fact I was 0 and closed until 12 hours before I delivered)... I delivered at 32 weeks after a toxic dose of mag sulfate in the hospital wouldn't stop labor. I was "diagnosed" with an "irritable uterus". I don't know whether to :LOL or at that archaic, sexist term! ANYWAY... for all you twin mamas still hangin in there, keep it up!! Also know that research clearly shows that twins DO mature faster than singletons... e.g., mine had apgars of 7/9 and 8/9 and breathed beautifully on their own. So even though 34 or 36 weeks is not ideal, it's a heck of a lot better than it would be for a singleton. (The doc in charge of our NICU said my twins fared about as well as a 35 week singleton would have.) So even though you want to do everything you can to grow those bundles til 40 weeks if you can, it really is true what they say, that 32 weeks is a big turning point for twins so you can relax *a little*.
Periwinkle is offline  
#33 of 35 Old 06-19-2004, 12:29 AM
 
Smilemomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Why, right here, of course!
Posts: 1,157
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I completely understand and am aware of the research showing the accelerated lung development of twins; that still doesn't mean that their "due dates" should be moved up, imo. Babies are more than just lung development, and getting them out just because "they'll probably be fine" is a bit too spooky for me. Smacks of the celebrities being induced or having elective sections at 8 months (coincidentally also 36 weeks?) just so they won't have to get much bigger. Sure, their babies will likely be fine ... Oh well, guess I am getting too philosophical about it.

And obviously there are plenty of informed twin mommas right here who went beyond 36 weeks. Does that mean they are all post-dates? Don't think so.

Sorry I posted too offhandedly to make myself clear.

And Apricot, thanks for the real link. Dr. Brewer has done more for healthy babies, especially multiples, than anyone I can think of.

Thanks again!
Smilemomma is offline  
#34 of 35 Old 06-19-2004, 02:02 PM
 
Periwinkle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 8,530
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Oh, Smilemomma you and I are in total agreement re: babies should stay in as long as possible. Didn't mean to imply otherwise. I just had a friend go through bedrest with twins and she was just relieved to know when she passed the 32 and then 34 week mark that she was over some sort of theoretical hump if that makes sense -- for moms who have to deal with bedrest, it's kind of comforting to get to the point where you know that every day counts but that the babies have a good shot at breathing well, etc etc.

And as someone who struggled with nursing issues due to immature suck/swallow reflexes until right around their original due date, you're preaching to the choir re: being able to breathe doesn't mean being ready to be born! No, 36 weeks certainly is NOT full term. All I was trying to say is that, for example, a 35 week twin will fare, overall, far better than a 35 week singleton. And that this knowledge is of course comforting in some way to a twin mama on bedrest.
Periwinkle is offline  
#35 of 35 Old 06-20-2004, 12:16 AM
 
Smilemomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Why, right here, of course!
Posts: 1,157
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Oh, Peri, thanks for your post! I guess I'm coming from the memory of fighting to keep them in. My own *midwife* called me three times in ONE DAY to try to get me to induce once I was 36 weeks. She even offered to do it with herbs or homeopathy since she knows how I am . I was all, "inducing is inducing no matter how natural the method!".

I ended up at the hospital "just to check on the babies" around that time. Fluid levels were great, BP great, heart tones great, fetal movement/lung movement great, etc. I was also dilated 5 cm and was having contractions I couldn't feel every 3 minutes.

I left. The nurses literally followed me to the elevator, saying "this is when we usually admit!"

I told them, "look, clearly I'll be back soon!" Jeepers :

I really felt like I spent my whole pregnancy, and daily my last month, fighting off every kind of medical person with a stick, every one of them saying I was "full term". Ugh.

So I got testy, hee hee. I apologize!

and and a too!
Smilemomma is offline  
Reply

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off