Question about breech babies

NatureLovers

I'm interested in finding out if it's common for a baby to turn head down vs breech. I'm also interested to know when you were first aware of the baby being breech, when/if the baby turned, and approx how many weeks along that happened.

NatureLovers

Also, if you have any info on why your baby was breech, please add those details.

My baby is currently breech at 23 weeks. I have 4 extremely large fibroids, which could prevent her from being able to turn or descend, so I will need a c-section, which I am 100% fine with. I'm also at risk for a placental abruption, which makes me not want to labor for that reason. Different doctors in my practice have differing opinions on whether the risk of abruption is significant enough for a scheduled elective C-section. I really do prefer the surgery as I feel it is makes the most sense and is the best choice for me in my situation. If my baby stays breech, then I won't have to face a potential showdown in case I get one of the OB's that would want me to TOLAC. I'm curious to find out how many babies turn of their own accord.

lilorangekitty

I had a feeling my baby was breech by about 34 weeks along, as I could feel her head pressing up on the top of my stomach. It was confirmed at 36 weeks by an ultrasound. I was already admitted to the hospital due to high BP so they wanted to induce me, until they realized my baby was breech,

They attempted to perform an external version, twice. The second time, after having given me an epidural. When that failed, I had a c-section.

NatureLovers

GhostMonkey said:

I'm laughing at breech at 23 weeks.

Fucking laughing.

I know that at 23 weeks it's quite likely most babies are going to go head down, and if I wanted a vag delivery, it would be silly to be freaking out over the baby being breech at 23 weeks. However, it's less likely (obvs not impossible) that the baby will turn due to my large fibroids blocking her in. At my A/S they had a hard time getting a clear picture of her around all the tumors. I'm hoping she stays breech, and doesn't turn, hence my curiosity about how many breech babies turn head down by delivery.

theseaword

My second baby was breech until 36 wks. The he turned on his own.

NatureLovers

lilorangekitty said:

I had a feeling my baby was breech by about 34 weeks along, as I could feel her head pressing up on the top of my stomach. It was confirmed at 36 weeks by an ultrasound. I was already admitted to the hospital due to high BP so they wanted to induce me, until they realized my baby was breech,

They attempted to perform an external version, twice. The second time, after having given me an epidural. When that failed, I had a c-section.

Thanks for sharing. Was the 36 week ultrasound the first time you knew she was breech?

My main curiosity is how many babies start out breech, and then stay that way.

NatureLovers

GhostMonkey said:

NatureLovers said:

GhostMonkey said:

I'm laughing at breech at 23 weeks.

Fucking laughing.

I know that at 23 weeks it's quite likely most babies are going to go head down, and if I wanted a vag delivery, it would be silly to be freaking out over the baby being breech at 23 weeks. However, it's less likely (obvs not impossible) that the baby will turn due to my large fibroids blocking her in. At my A/S they had a hard time getting a clear picture of her around all the tumors. I'm hoping she stays breech, and doesn't turn, hence my curiosity about how many breech babies turn head down by delivery.

Most turn. And most don't have a clue on the position at 23 weeks because it's completely irrelevant.

Schedule the c-section and tell any of the OBs (which yours is the only one that matters) to go fuck themselves if they don't feel it is necessary. It sounds like in your case it is the better option and you are ok with it, so fuck them.



.........
LOL, that's exactly how I feel. I'm praying that we can actually schedule the C-sec, so I can have the provider I like. But since I'm due 1/1, it's possible I will be giving birth around Christmas, so if I go into spontaneous labor, I could wind up with one of the two miserable twats that I can't stand attending me, and I know there will be words exchanged, and I really don't want to have that kind of experience if I can avoid it. So I was hoping to hear "nah, most breech babies stay that way", so that I don't have to worry about arguing with them about my section. I tried googling stats and got conflicting numbers, the most common seemed to be 1 in 25 are breech at birth, so those odds aren't too bad if they're correct

SuperTreesa

Stop borrowing trouble. The position of your baby now or at 39+ weeks is irrelevant in your situation. You have other very valid, serious reasons for needing/wanting a csection. That's it.

what does it matter if there is a 16.7% chance of the baby staying in the breech position? (obviously percentages were pulled from ass)

Bythebeach09

I think it's safe to assume the majority flip, since that's what's "supposed" to happen. Otherwise, the majority of babies would be born feet first, which they're not. I'm sure if you search for percentages of breech babies there's a statistic out there.

Like pp said, I would just schedule the section and plan for that. Good luck!

Bythebeach09

I'm kind of surprised that your doctor wouldn't just automatically talk csection based on large fibroids. There's no harm in you requesting one.

NatureLovers

SuperTreesa said:

Stop borrowing trouble. The position of your baby now or at 39+ weeks is irrelevant in your situation. You have other very valid, serious reasons for needing/wanting a csection. That's it.


what does it matter if there is a 16.7% chance of the baby staying in the breech position?
(obviously percentages were pulled from ass)

I agree that the section is totally warranted. But I know two doctors (out of 8) in the practice don't agree. They would want me to try to attempt labor first to see if the baby descends, and my risk of placental abruption is no big deal in their assy opinion, because they could run me right back and section me. I don't want an emergency section under frightening circumstances, especially after laboring! But those two docs have as much compassion as snakes.

I'm a FTM, so I haven't done this before, so please bear with me. Is it possible to get an appointment with one of the doctors I like, explain the situation and have them put me on their schedule for a c-section? Since it's a group practice, I don't know whether or not all the doctors have to agree to the plan, or is the permission of one doctor enough? This becomes especially important if I go into labor prior to the scheduled c-sec, and I wind up with one of the shitty on call docs who might try to refuse the section. That's the situation I'm trying to avoid - getting into a tense exchange and then having to allow a doctor that's angry operating on me.

RondackHiker

NatureLovers said:

SuperTreesa said:

Stop borrowing trouble. The position of your baby now or at 39+ weeks is irrelevant in your situation. You have other very valid, serious reasons for needing/wanting a csection. That's it.


what does it matter if there is a 16.7% chance of the baby staying in the breech position?
(obviously percentages were pulled from ass)

I agree that the section is totally warranted. But I know two doctors (out of 8) in the practice don't agree. They would want me to try to attempt labor first to see if the baby descends, and my risk of placental abruption is no big deal in their assy opinion, because they could run me right back and section me. I don't want an emergency section under frightening circumstances, especially after laboring! But those two docs have as much compassion as snakes.

I'm a FTM, so I haven't done this before, so please bear with me. Is it possible to get an appointment with one of the doctors I like, explain the situation and have them put me on their schedule for a c-section? Since it's a group practice, I don't know whether or not all the doctors have to agree to the plan, or is the permission of one doctor enough? This becomes especially important if I go into labor prior to the scheduled c-sec, and I wind up with one of the shitty on call docs who might try to refuse the section. That's the situation I'm trying to avoid - getting into a tense exchange and then having to allow a doctor that's angry operating on me.

A good doctor won't let anger impact their surgery.

I'd talk to the doctor you like and say you don't want the risk of laboring first and ask to schedule a section when he or she is working. They don't all need to agree.

And for the two who don't... Say clearly you don't want the risk.

NatureLovers

RondackHiker said:

NatureLovers said:

SuperTreesa said:

Stop borrowing trouble. The position of your baby now or at 39+ weeks is irrelevant in your situation. You have other very valid, serious reasons for needing/wanting a csection. That's it.


what does it matter if there is a 16.7% chance of the baby staying in the breech position?
(obviously percentages were pulled from ass)

I agree that the section is totally warranted. But I know two doctors (out of 8) in the practice don't agree. They would want me to try to attempt labor first to see if the baby descends, and my risk of placental abruption is no big deal in their assy opinion, because they could run me right back and section me. I don't want an emergency section under frightening circumstances, especially after laboring! But those two docs have as much compassion as snakes.

I'm a FTM, so I haven't done this before, so please bear with me. Is it possible to get an appointment with one of the doctors I like, explain the situation and have them put me on their schedule for a c-section? Since it's a group practice, I don't know whether or not all the doctors have to agree to the plan, or is the permission of one doctor enough? This becomes especially important if I go into labor prior to the scheduled c-sec, and I wind up with one of the shitty on call docs who might try to refuse the section. That's the situation I'm trying to avoid - getting into a tense exchange and then having to allow a doctor that's angry operating on me.

A good doctor won't let anger impact their surgery.

I'd talk to the doctor you like and say you don't want the risk of laboring first and ask to schedule a section when he or she is working. They don't all need to agree.

And for the two who don't... Say clearly you don't want the risk.

...........

I wouldn't consider the two a-hole doctors to be good doctors, and I believe they would try to retaliate against me (one more than the other) based on my previous experience with her during a recent hospitalization for my pregnancy. Switching OB's is not currently possible due to financial issues.

I guess I will schedule an appt with my preferred doctor and see what she says about it. She's always booked but I have some time to get in with her. Thanks!

Bythebeach09

If you schedule a section it will be with the doctor of your choice and the day/time of the doctor's availability. I had one emergency csection (DS's giant self got stuck) and one planned. The emergency section after 18 hours of induced labor was literal hell. The scheduled one was much better. Because my babies were huge, they didn't want me to go into labor with my second. I think they scheduled me at around 34 weeks for a section during my 39th week. I chose to have it exactly on my due date. I had my regular OB and it was much much much less stressful. My first section was with a doctor I didn't know and had never seen in the practice. I had labored past my OB's shift and got stuck with a stranger.

NatureLovers

Bythebeach09 said:

If you schedule a section it will be with the doctor of your choice and the day/time of the doctor's availability. I had one emergency csection (DS's giant self got stuck) and one planned. The emergency section after 18 hours of induced labor was literal hell. The scheduled one was much better. Because my babies were huge, they didn't want me to go into labor with my second. I think they scheduled me at around 34 weeks for a section during my 39th week. I chose to have it exactly on my due date. I had my regular OB and it was much much much less stressful. My first section was with a doctor I didn't know and had never seen in the practice. I had labored past my OB's shift and got stuck with a stranger.

I've heard that too, a section after laboring is hell, which is why I don't want to try it. Unfortunately, the day I turn 39 weeks is Christmas Day, so I won't have the luxury of being too picky about staff. I'm hoping they'll do it a few days before.

NNGnome

It may be different in the U.S. but in Canada everyone has the right to request a scheduled c-section whether there is medical reason or not, and you have one so i see no reason why anyone would refuse.

FWIW I had two babies that were breech at 20 weeks and never turned (i had u/s at least once a week from then until they were born). I have an oddly shapped uterus from prevous surgeries which is probably why they never moved.

lilorangekitty

NatureLovers said:

I had a feeling my baby was breech by about 34 weeks along, as I could feel her head pressing up on the top of my stomach. It was confirmed at 36 weeks by an ultrasound. I was already admitted to the hospital due to high BP so they wanted to induce me, until they realized my baby was breech,

They attempted to perform an external version, twice. The second time, after having given me an epidural. When that failed, I had a c-section.

Thanks for sharing. Was the 36 week ultrasound the first time you knew she was breech? My main curiosity is how many babies start out breech, and then stay that way.

Yes. My only ultrasound prior to that was at 20 weeks. I have no idea what position she was in then.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

aerotigergirl

becwheat said:

SS- I did not know my baby was breech until I was 7-8cm dilated and there was no chance to do a ECV. I had a c-section after 6 hours of un-medicated labor  >:P

@becwheat - We may be long lost labor sisters. I had 10 hours of un-medicated labor only to discover (once I hit 10cm and the midwife broke my water) that DS was frank breech. It was all of the suck.

BootsOrHearts

Babies can do all kinds of gymnastics between 23 weeks and when you go into labor so it's a bit early to think about baby flipping. Baby will probably flip, roll, turn, twist hundreds of times between now and then. 

That being said, I was a planned C due to fibroid surgery and the risk of uterine rupture associated with labor after that kind of surgery. I've never had a vaginal birth and never will so can't 

I don't have any advice except to commiserate with you about fibroids. Hate those things. 

Unknown

This content has been removed.

carrotcake06

My singleton was head down the entire time.

W my twins, baby a flipped breech at 19w and wedged his bum way down in my pelvis and that was the end of him flipping. Baby b flipped until the end.

I ended up w an emergency c/s under general anesthesia bc when baby a's water broke, his cord prolapsed.

Twins are a completely different ball game, I know.

lildevil968

DD was breach until right around 37 wks. She turned head down on her own.

wino2006

Frank breech (butt down, feet up by head) at 27 week growth scan and never turned. She was breech for so long that my OB did not recommend a version because frequently they turn back which he predicted would happen. We scheduled a c-section. She was in that position for so long that her legs bounced up by her head right after birth. We have pictures of her swaddled with her feet by her head and her sucking her toes. I am glad my OB RN friends warned me of that otherwise I would have been freaked out by that.

flerlgirl

DD was breech until about 32 weeks; I had an RCS scheduled regardless.

acesup

I would talk to your main doctor about your concerns with the other doctor. Of you're scheduling you can choose who the doctor will be so it won't matter what the other say.

I had two scheduled c-sections. I had ultrasounds every few weeks because I was high risk and I believe both turned head down somewhere around 30-34 weeks and I assume they stayed that way but who knows.

The only thing I wanted to add is that they likely won't even put you on the schedule this early because they probably don't even have the schedule made up yet. My 2nd was a repeat and knew from day 1 I would be scheduled but I was not even scheduled until around 34 weeks when they made the schedule for the month I was due.

They usually only go earlier than 39 weeks if there is an issue. My first was 38.5 weeks and my second was scheduled for 39 but they took him a few days early due to BP.

I have a friend who was due 1/1 with her 3rd and was scheduled. She didn't want to be in the hospital on Christmas and miss it with her boys so the doctor scheduled her for the 20th because he didn't want to go later than 39 weeks due to other issues. If they want to avoid you going into labor for issues they may do it before 39 weeks.

dancingmatilda

DD was in complete breech position at 39 week appt, at which my Dr suggested a c-section. There was no way that girl was turning in there, and she had been int he same position for several weeks. I had some scar tissue issues that we were also concerned about, so c-section was an easy choice. Don't stress yourself out about it. As your due date gets closer your Dr will likely go ahead and schedule the c-section. Mine knew the baby was breech for awhile but didn't schedule the c-section until literally the day before.