Inductions?

I was only due yesterday and my doctor already scheduled an induction to be on Wed the 3rd. I told her that I am not comfortable with an induction b/c I do not want any pain meds or an epidural but I know that if I am induced I will probably want an epidural. She scheduled my induction anyway and told me to call her the day before if I am still pregnant and let her know if I want to put it off another week but that I would have to come in for a bunch of tests like a stress test and some others. Part of me is tempted just to keep my induction date to get this over with. I am miserable but the other part of me does not want to give in yet. My husband and I have sex everyday, I exercise and walk frequently and still no baby. I've been told horror stories about castor oil but I'm about ready to try it b/c I want this baby out soon without being medically induced. Any advice???

 

How late are you?

 

they didn't induce me but they gave me pitocin to speed up contractions, and let me tell you it hurt like HELL. I would wait as long as you can if possible, that baby will come out on it's own.

 

hmm that's a bit early then I would care to induce.. who did you see? your consultant? or a jumior medic?

is this your first? any problems so far? if not I would be comfortable to leave you till term +10 which is roughly when I would consider inducing you. just call up and say you'd prefer to leave it for now. get the tests done (they don't take that long really) if your medic feels you have to have them. which country are you from? here in the UK I'd be happy to go with just a normal CTG as and indicator that baby is fine at term +3.

 

I would suggest you wait. Attempting an induction for no good reason is recipe for disaster (do you want to read the horror story of the birth of my first child?). If left alone, most women gestate 41 weeks in the first place. If there are no signs of fetal distress there is no reason to induce. If there is fetal distress, there probably isn't time for induction, and I'd go straight to cesarean. But whatever you decide, it is YOUR decision to make, not your doctor's! Get the patient info sheets on the drugs your doc wants to use on you, and educate yourself about the risks. Weigh those risks against the ones of not inducing (given your unique situation). Also find out your Bishop's Score, which will tell you how likely induction will work for you at this time. Do your homework, don't rely on any one source of information, whether it's your doctor or faceless people online, read the facts for yourself and make your own informed decision. You cannot make an informed decision if you are not fully informed.

 

If this is your first child, more than likely you will gestate 41 weeks, 3 days. That's the average.

And if you feel in your gut you shouldn't induce, DON'T DO IT! Frankly, stress tests don't really do much anyway, so I wouldn't bother (but I hate fetal monitoring).

Also, remember that if you don't like your doctor, you can still switch. You can switch/fire doctors even if you're in labour.

With my daughter, I was exactly ten days late. Labour started on it's own. If you can, try to find a midwife if your doctor irks you. I found a new midwife at 37 weeks and I'm glad I did.

In any case, just rest up! In a few days, you're going to be desperate for sleep.

And happy baby moon, if we don't hear from you!

 

oops Silly me I am such an air head today. With you only being a day late it seems weird for them to want to induce so quickly. I thought that the average was 10 days late before they would talk about inducing because due dates can be off so they wait. It is a little weird. Just keep up with what you are doing walking a lot helps. A friend of mine was about 5 days late and her water broke while she was walking laps up and down her street. My Aunt was more than 10 days late but with her they should have induced sooner she is a very small lady only 5 ft. and her baby was over 10 pounds and there where a lot of problems with the delivery because of his size. It is your decision to induce just keep on top of what the DR.'s are talking about and if you have a question don't be afraid to ask it's your body and your baby.

 

i was induced when i had my son. but that was 13 days after his due date and his estimated weight was over 9lbs. just because you're induced doesnt mean u need drugs. they ended up breaking my water and giving me pitocin the morning my son actually came out, and i didn't use any drugs. I did get nubain but the was during the night when the contractions where getting worse and i just wanted to take a nap. I sometimes wish i wasnt induced, i feel like it took Aydin's choice due date away. But being 2 weeks over due is a little uncomfortable. Best wishes with what ever choice you make, no matter what u'll end up with a beautiful baby, that will scream its head off!!!

 

I also didn't have any drugs with my induction. My water broke, but no contractions. One day late and already scheduled an induction? What kind of relationship do you have with your caregiver? Its sad but true that some Dr's want to schedule an induction (and insist you will "need" drugs) just because its easier than dealing with a consience in control laboring woman. I've seen it tried a few times on friends in the cincinnati area and my Dr told me that lots of OB's don't like to deal with women who want to do it their way.

 

Well, it's not that I don't like my doctor. She is not forcing me to have an induction. She was not the one who told me that I would need an epidural if I was induced. That is my own decision based on the information that I have about inductions. I know that it overstimulates your uterus and does make for a much more painful labor than a spontaneous labor (in most cases). I do think it is odd that she was so quick to schedule an induction, though. She knows how I feel about it and that is why she gave me the option of rescheduling the induction for another week if I am still pregnant the day before. She said that it is easier to cxl one than it is to schedule one at the last min. I believe there is a full moon on the 3rd and I will go ahead and have her cxl my induction if I have not delivered before then. Thanks for the advice.

 

Traditionally, nurses get nervous about "Full Moon" deliveries. My dd Moon was a Full Moon baby, and the place was FULL, and my freinds (the nurses) were telling me all the weird things that were going on. I had a protracted labor, with a posterior brow presentation, which ended in a section. I'd NOT scedule, if at all possible, but avoid the Full Moon. If you are looking for Moon Births, new Moons are actually prefered, (and it will give you an other two weeks at least, which is about normal. You may well not have conceived on the day you though. We lactation Consultants see a condition we call "Induction Syndrome" which usually occurs when the baby was born, but not acccording to HER or HIS own time. These babies have more difficulty latching, they nurse like large premies, and they also have more respiratory problems, and are often WAY under the weight they told you they would be. On average, the baby with Immaturity or Induction Syndrome is a pound or more lighter than the mom was told. Let your BABY decide when HE or SHE wants to be born.

Blessings.

 

With all due respect, I woudn't put too much store in this. Not sure where u're getting your info from. To my knowledge no one knows what the exact mechanism that starts labour is. Saying that's it's baby deciding wouldn't be the accepted view for sure. What we do know is that the in utero perinatal mortality rate i.e. babies dying before birth increases after 42 weeks. That number doubles by 43-44 weeks comparing it to babies delivered by 42 weeks depending on which study you look at.

Let me ask you this. If you do believe in induction syndrome, wouldn't it be more logical that these babies who are born up to a lb lighter have got a degree of intrauterine growth retardation that lead to the problems after birth (rather than suffering induction syndrome)? After all if induction syndrome is a true entity, it would be logical that it would affect a WHOLE range of babies of all weights. I hate to call it misinformation but I have to call it as I see it.

 

i'll not get into the gory details of my first child's birth, but it was attempted induction that led to fetal heart decelerations that led to cesarean. She was three pounds lighter than U/S estimated her to be, just the day before she was born, three different u/s, three different doctors taking the measurements and estimating her weight. For all intents and purposes she was a premie, at 37 weeks after my last menstrual period, but since I have long cycles, she was probably closer to 35-36 weeks instead. She was born without the normal hunger cues that full term babies have. She was also tongue-tied, which led to low weight gain which led to supplements which led to me losing my milk supply, all in the first month of her life. And she developed major jaundice just days after birth which meant a second hospital stay, and another copay. Induction meds have been proven to cause many of these issues, it's not just a theory. If you are in doubt about any medication, it is your right as a patient to be fully informed. The law states that you must be given the patient information sheet and package inserts, but very few of us are even offered these things, much less read them and understand what the risks really are.

 

this isn't a case where the induction caused the problem. this is a classic case of what we would call IUGR - intrauterine growth restriction. the problem isn't the induction. at 36-37 weeks I would expect the baby to be round about the 2.5-3.0 kg weight (5.5lbs to.6lbs). a baby that's 3 lbs lighter would be 2.5-3.6 lbs. Can you confirm what weight your baby was at birth? because if a baby is that light at 37 weeks and it is picked up by US then you'd be looking for a cause and certainly doing a lot more tests of fetal wellbeing. the problem is the baby isn't growing normally and in a nutshell you have to monitor the pregnancy very very closely and decide when you're going to deliver based on a series of tests. and if you deliver it would be straight to caesarian section or in a very few cases (where the cervix appears to be favorable for delivery) a very short trial of induction and if that fails a section.

I am not sure why you ended up with an induction at 37 weeks. logically speaking, if the baby is charted to be growing fine at 37 weeks, why would anyone want to schedule an induction? just leave the pregnancy to go to term. that there was an attempted induction suggest to me that something was not quite right. no offence but the story doesn't tie up. I'm not going to post anymore on this thread. I have no wish to comment on medical cases where I do not have the case notes to hand or to appear to second guess the decisions of my colleagues.

I will restate that whilst forums and boards can provide support and some answers to questions about induction, this is one area of obstetrics where you absolutely need all the information at hand before you make a decision. it really is a case of leave it to the professionals. anecdotal and non-professionals opinions really should be treated with a huge degree of scepticism.

 

No, small babies who come when they are ready have few problems. My youngest was 5.5 lbs. She didn't have Induction Syndrome, and nursed very well. I've seen 8 lb, and 10 lb kids who have Induction Syndrome. There is A LOT about childbrith and breastfeeidng that they don't teach you in Med School. I HAD to learn about childbirth to become an LC, may I ask, with all due respect, what your background, in either classromm education or CEUs, about Lactation is? In the USA, NO doctor has to have a single CEU about lactation for ANY work in medicine. Yet, LCs have to have dozens of hours work in childbirth, child development and nutrition. (Not to mention the three years of Lactation Study.)

When it comes to lactation, childbirth, and things like the Moon, doctors are usually very resistant to change. There is more we DON'T know about these things than we do. Midwives and LCs look at these things from a much different perspective, which is why our results are usually less invasive in normal natural situations.

My info comes from NURSES. Listening to what they KNOW can be very helpful. As for the "mechanism, we KNOW that the baby sends out a large amount of prostaglandins when her lungs, body and organs are ready to go. TAKING a baby out of the womb, when those signals aren't there (unless the child's life is in danger from staying in the womb, we know) causes MORE problems than it solves. There is still tons of stuff we don't know, but RARELY is Induction better than waiting until the baby says "I'm ready to be born."

 

with all due respect, you have no business making statements like "rarely is induction better than waiting until the baby says "I'm ready to be born." last I looked midwives and nurses weren't in a position to make such decisions. I do not say this to sound arrogant. I say this simply because they do not receive the rigorous training that allows them to make such decisions. for better or worse, obgyns take such decisions based as far as possible on statistical clinical trials. you want to make such decisions? may I suggest you get the relevant degrees? without it, you do not have enough background to even start discussing whether induction is indicated much less whether there is any scientific basis for induction syndrome as well as how it affects lactation.

I am sorry if I sound harsh but lay people second guessing doctors is rarely a good thing.

 

But statistical data doesn't interpret well into individual situations. You have to look at an individual woman's fertile cycle, the possible times of conception, the baby's stats, how well the mother is doing, but most importantly, you need to rely on intuition and natural triggers.

If it were true that midwifes and lactation consultants couldn't say these things, if they didn't know their information, then the stats for homebirths and other midwife-attended births would be much less safe than hospital birth. However, midwife-attended births are just as safe, if not more so, in normal pregnancy than hospital doctor-attended birth.

 

I SEE what happens when people like you YANK babies out of wombs, for convenience, and I SEE the damage done. Yeah, there is statistical evidence. As for "rigorous training" WHAT traning in Child Development after birth and Lactation do YOU have? I spent as much time studying lactation, and what SHITTY childbirth interventions can do to it, as you spent in Medical School.

This is a COMMON SENSE board. Not a "worship He with the MD board. And question not." Oh. sorry if that sounded harsh. What you seem to know or CARE about what happens to these babies AFTER THEY GO HOME, and try to NURSE normally, when I have to deal with them, could fit in a thimble. However. MIDWIVES and lactation consultants ususally know at least as much about childbirth as MDs do. And we ususally don't try to SPEED IT UP and fuck it up, so we don't have to work late on weekends. (Yeah, I've worked in Hospitals where there was NEVER a natural, normal length birth on weekends or holidays, and on those days MOST of the births were C Sections. "Oh, 4 cm for more than an hour. Into the ER with you." Sheesh.

AMen. There is PLENTY of statistical evidence for that. Also, I deal with HUMANS, and not all of them have read the Stats, neither have the babies, whose mamas were told "Oh. That baby is going to be at least 9 lbs, let's induce to get it out of there." And she gets induced, the baby WEIGHS 6 LBS and has Induction Sydrome, ends up on formula, the mama is dying inside because she wasn't allowed to nurse her baby properly and the OBGYN has already moved on to INTERVENING on the next pregnancies he "Manages."

 

As much of a "position" as you.

 

Please somebody quote some numbers to this guy. I believe The farm, were women recieve care ONLY from Midwives, has a less than 2% rate of ANY type of intervention. (Induction, cesarean, epesiotomy etc.) What about you? My Midwife knew an awful lot about how a normal birth should proceed. OB's have a tendency in my experience (with my aunts and sisters and cousins births) to want to intervene to PREVENT a complication and CAUSE four more complications in the process. Example: Doctor wants to induce for whatever reason. The induction causes baby to go into distress. Doctor tells parents a cesarean is necessary to "save" the baby. (Who at this point may very well need saving.) Cesarean is performed. Because baby never went through birth canal he still has fluid in his lungs and has trouble breathing. The baby gets "saved". The parents walk away, in their ignorance, profoundly grateful. "If we hadn't been in the hospital with a Dr.' they say 'our baby, and probably Mama, SURELy would have died!" When in all reality they could have, and "statistically" WOULD have had a beautiful NORMAL birth if it had all been left alone to go as it needed to. Birth is NOT an illness that needs to be MESSED with. It is a healthy and NATURAL process that needs only to be guided by someone who has had "rigorous training" in natural births.