Natural Birth

Group B Strep

Hi, luker here...

I'm 39 wks days pregnant.  I'm 5 cm dilated, nicely effaced, and I'm being told that baby's head is very low.  I've also tested positive for GBS.  I have been dilating very consistently over the past weeks with zero contractions so my dr. is concerned that when I go into labor that this baby will be born very quickly.  There is a concern that they won't be able to get me antibiotics within the recommended time frame before the baby is born.  (I've been instructed to get to the hospital within 30 minutes of starting contractions...)  My dr. wants me to consider being induced so there is a little more control over the situation, i.e. give antibiotics, wait 4 hours, then induce labor.  I'm not crazy about this idea... I kind of go by the philosophy that babies come when they're meant to and not on my timeframe BUT here is my question...  I hate antibiotics for my kids.  If I don't make it in time, they will automatically treat my baby with antibiotics after birth.  Is there a difference in them treating me with antibiotics vs. treating the baby after birth (anyone have any ideas on this??)  Is baby still getting as much medication when I get an IV vs. giving it directly to her?  Granted, I know if I'm induced the baby will be exposed to other drugs as well, just trying to look at all the angles.  I go to the dr. tomorrow to discuss my options and I'll ask the same thing then, just wondering if anyone else has had to deal with this.  THoughts? 

Re: Group B Strep

  • DS was born before I received a full dose of antibiotics and they didn't give him any after birth.  They just watched him more closely for signs of infection and would give him antibiotics only if necessary.  He ended up being fine.  If a GBS+ mom doesn't receive antibiotics the chance of the baby contracting it are only 1 in 200. 

    I really don't think fast labor is a good reason to induce in this case.  Even if you're 5cm now, chances are that you will still have plenty of time for antibiotics.  If you're really concerned just go to the hospital sooner than you had planned.

    Image and video hosting by TinyPic

    med-free birth x2, breastfeeding, baby wearing SAHM
    Baby Birthday Ticker Ticker
    My BFP Chart

    Baby Birthday Ticker Ticker
  • Loading the player...
  • My situation is a little different in that my OB told me to go ahead and labor at home as long as I felt comfortable b/c the chances that I'd be at the hospital for less than 4 hours to receive the second dose, as a FTM, were slim.  I showed up to the hospital an 8, and by the time they were giving me the IV, I was starting to feel pressure and knew it was too late.  When she couldn't get the first IV in, I asked for a waiver to decline the antibiotics altogether (baby was born an hour later, which I was sure would happen).  So, neither of us ever got antibiotics.  They did NOT give him any after birth.  My options were that they'd do a full blood workup on our little guy at 4 hours old or we had to stay in the hospital 48 hours.  We stayed 48 hours.  It was really no big deal at all.  In your case, I'd wait for labor to begin on it's own, go in when you're comfortable, and get the antibiotics if you believe you'll be there to get a second dose, and plan for a possible 48 hour hospital stay.
    Lilypie Second Birthday tickersLilypie First Birthday tickers
  • imagekatcarls:

    DS was born before I received a full dose of antibiotics and they didn't give him any after birth.  They just watched him more closely for signs of infection and would give him antibiotics only if necessary.  He ended up being fine. 

    I had a similar situation. I didn't end up receiving any antibiotics because I didn't realize when my water broke. It was more of a trickle in the middle of the night and in my half-asleep haze, I thought I had peed myself. I didn't realize until I arrived at the hospital fully dilated and ready to push that my water had broken hours before. There was no time for antibiotics.

    They just monitored DD and since she seemed fine, didn't give her any antibiotics. We were discharged within the normal time frame for a vaginal birth.

    Photobucket Baby Birthday Ticker Ticker
  • If I had to do it all over again, I'm pretty sure I would decline the antibiotics so in your situation I would not agree to either option presented. It was one of those things I didn't care much about either way so as to not "rock the boat" but I suspect the abx had some far reaching effects that I didn't know to consider then. OTOH, I would be ok with something like the hibiclens wash, additional monitoring and/or bloodwork.
  • image4LittleDucks:

    I hate antibiotics for my kids.  If I don't make it in time, they will automatically treat my baby with antibiotics after birth.  Is there a difference in them treating me with antibiotics vs. treating the baby after birth (anyone have any ideas on this??)  Is baby still getting as much medication when I get an IV vs. giving it directly to her? 

    Your daughter will get less abx if you have them during labor than if the were directly administered to her. If you do get them, you can have her do skin-to-skin with your partner/DH after birth, so she can be colonized by good bacteria, and there's even powdered probiotics that are gentle enough to give to newborns.

    I don't think there's a hospital in the US that will administer Hibiclens for GBS, quite honestly. And not all hospitals will do watchful waiting for babies whose mothers are GBS+ and haven't had antibiotics. You can definitely request watchful waiting, and probably sign an AMA form if it comes down to it.

    Is this your first baby? Have you talked to your provider specifically about what the induction process would be? You can request they start with less invasive methods if you opt for it (breast pump, stripping membranes, foley bulb, etc). I think being 5 cm dilated is definitely in your favor of induction being successful.  If it's not your first baby, then I would probably opt for it to avoid giving antibiotics to a newborn.

    ETA: Your post reminded me of this birth story, she was very dilated, but still not in labor. Her MW broke her water and she had a med-free vaginal birth. hth!

    https://www.babyrabies.com/2011/01/leynas-birth-story/

    DS1 - Feb 2008

    DS2 - Oct 2010 (my VBAC baby!)

  • imagekatcarls:

    DS was born before I received a full dose of antibiotics and they didn't give him any after birth.  They just watched him more closely for signs of infection and would give him antibiotics only if necessary.  He ended up being fine.  If a GBS+ mom doesn't receive antibiotics the chance of the baby contracting it are only 1 in 200

    I really don't think fast labor is a good reason to induce in this case.  Even if you're 5cm now, chances are that you will still have plenty of time for antibiotics.  If you're really concerned just go to the hospital sooner than you had planned.

    -This may be true, however, 1 in every 20 babies born with GBS will die.

    -If you get the antibiotics, the chances of the baby contracting GBS goes way down: 1 in 4,000 instead of 1 in 200.

    My baby suffered from GBS. It was life threatening and caused him to have sepsis and pnuemonia. He was also treated for menigitis. He was in the NICU for 17 days and there were times we didnt think he was coming home.

    I had tested NEGATIVE so antibiotics for me were not even an option.

    Please just do whatever you have to lessen the chances of your baby becoming infected....even if it means induction. 

    Good Luck!

    Warning No formatter is installed for the format bbhtml
This discussion has been closed.
Choose Another Board
Search Boards
"
"