3rd Trimester
Induction -- any cons?
I'm due on the 14th of June. My OB usually induced by the 41st week.
Today I asked when they'd likely induce me if my due date came and went ... they said likely the 16th and 17th. I was surprised because I figured they'd wait about 7 days to induce, not 2 or 3.
Either way, I tend to usually do whatever the doctor wants to do ... but I figured I'd put this out there. Anyone have thoughts on why and induction at that point would be bad, as opposed to waiting a little longer?
Warning
No formatter is installed for the format bbhtml
This discussion has been closed.
Re: Induction -- any cons?
Pitocin contractions are suppose to be far far worse than non-induced contractions.
Also, the general rule is the more medical interventions the more likely you are going to need a c-section.
I spoke to my OB about when he would want to induce, and he seems to be more inclined to waiting, but checking the baby & placenta w/ NSTs and u/s to make sure everything is ok, and if it's not, then inducing.
This. I was induced with DD at 41 weeks and the cervadil actually caused me to start contracting (which its not supposed to) and I went from no contractions to very painful contractions every 30 sec. within 2 hrs of placing the cervadil. They took it out and then waited until I dilated a little and then started the pitocin. It is also true that you are more inclined to need a c-section. I was close with DD. I don't think I'll have to be induced this time around though, timing contractions as we speak...
This. Although they didn't take it out of me.My dr scheduled my induction for 5 days after my due date because that's when she was working the maternity ward. They broke my water when i wasn't even 2cm (thats as far as I ever got) noticed the merconium, waited a couple hours to see if I'd progress then did the c-section when his heart rate kept dropping. If I had to do it all over again I would have held off on the induction another couple days
It would be helpful for you to know your Bishop's score before making a decision about how comfortable you feel about an induction. The rate of other interventions being needed drops dramatically if you have a high bishop's score. For example, if you are not dilated or effaced and the baby has not dropped, your induction is likely to go less smoothly than if you are induced at 3 cm, 80% effaced and at 0 station.
Hmm ... I hadn't heard of the Bishop's score, I'd like to look into this. I just turned 38 weeks and I'm currently 50% effaced (I've been so for 3 weeks), 1-2 cm, and baby's been head down since about 31 weeks.
Definitely ask your bishop's score before induction. A score of less than 8 will likely lead to a more difficult induction. You will need to know your score on the day of induction. Pitocin should not be started for a score of 7 or less yet many doctors do... do some research. Induction can be a good thing but it is often not.
I've been induced for 3 out of 4 of my pregnancies, and had a vaginal births with all of them, pain med free (IMO the contractions with pitocin are that bad). I know everyone is different, but you also have to realize some of the people who are induced that end up with a c-section would have ended up with a c-section anyway.
1) If you go past your due date (be it 3 days or 3 weeks) if your body isn't progressing you are going to end up with a c-section to get your LO out.
2) some inductions are done early due to the health of the baby or mother, and if your body won't progress due to it not being ready, again you will end up with a c-section.
3) If you are induced and your LO doesn't tolerate labor well you might end up with a c-section, but who's to say that if you went into natural labor that your baby wouldn't have reacted the same way?
Are there people who get induced that end up in a c-section that might have not needed one had they waited? Sure, but you have to read the research as to why and when women were induced to get an accurate answer.