- Pregnancy
- Baby & Toddler
- Parents
- Getting Pregnant
- Baby Names
- Product Reviews
-
Registry
- Community
-
More
Want a personalized experience?
Download the free app
VBAC
Any VBAC success - too small pelvic opening?
With my DS, my water broke, labored for 25 hours and then had a csection due to DS not fitting through my pelvic bone (and it was 25 hours after my water broke). My OB told me that DS was still super high and hadn't even made it into my pelvic bone area (if that makes sense). Would you try for a VBAC or not even risk it? My OB said that I was too small for him to pass through so I'm nervous the same thing will happen again...
This discussion has been closed.
Re: Any VBAC success - too small pelvic opening?
My c/s was for the same reason. The OB that did my c/s told me that I would never be able to deliver vaginally unless I had a preemie, because my pelvis was too small.
I did some research on my own and discovered that it was not quite so clear cut. First, my baby was OP and having a malpositioned baby significantly increases the odds of having a c/s. Do you know if your baby was malpositioned? I also found that pushing in diffeerent positions can change the shape and size of your pelvis, and sometimes babies need that to fit through. Finally, I found that over 60% of women who have a c/s for cephalopelvic disproportion are able to have VBACs.
I decided I wanted to give it a try. I got a w second opinions and they all told me that I would be a good candidate for VBAC. I found a new OB who was supportive and had a high success rate with VBAC. And I delivered my second child vaginally, with no trouble. He was even a little bit bigger than my first baby!
GL
My OB checked my pelvic opening during my c-section and said there was no way my baby would have fit. She "floated" (didn't descend) the entire 29 hours of my labor. I still decided to try for a VBAC. I've learned a few things - MANY women get this diagnosis. It is almost NEVER true. Back in 1970, 5% of births were by c-section. Women weren't routinely told back then that their babies couldn't fit. Have we really evolved into a race of women who can birth their babies because their pelvises are too small? I also got to witness a c-section and realized that there was no way he could "measure" my pelvis because there are too many organs, tissues, blood vessels, etc in the way. OBs just tell women that to make them feel better about their c-sections.
About 36 hours into my labor with baby #2, she finally descended and came vaginally with no issues at all. for some reason, I am just designed to have long labors. My 2nd baby's head didn't even have a bit of molding so my pelvis is clearly more than adequate. I did not go back to the first OB; I went with a small midwifery practice that believes in womens' ability to birth their babies.
My c/s was not for these reasons, but in going to ICAN meetings and researching VBAC I have heard many stories of women who had a c/s due to CPD and then went on to have successful VBAC. If I were in your situation I would definitely try it.
If your son had not even descended fully into your pelvis, I don't know how they would have been able to tell that he couldn't fit. As the baby descends, your pelvis makes adjustments to allow baby through. You produce hormones that allow things to stretch, and baby's head molds to fit. It also helps to have good positioning. Look into optimal fetal positioning. You could also try going to a chiropractor during pregnancy to get everthing lined up optimally.
This was my question as well. Sometimes babies don't engage for reasons unrelated to anatomy of the mom. Short cord, malpositioning - those are two reasons why. It would help if you knew if either of those were an issue. My DD stayed up very high and when my water broke came down asynclitic with an OP presentation. She was just stuck in a place that made it difficult for my cervix to dilate further. We're planning a VBAC this time because those situations are unlikely to re-occur.
As the others have said, many women are told they cannot birth a baby for this reason. It is almost never true. I read somewhere that in virtually all cases in which a woman has been proven to be "too small" to birth a child naturally it was due to abnormalities such as rickets, severe pelvic damage (crushed in car accident, for example), dwarfism, etc.
FWIW, I pushed DS1 for three hours and when he didn't budge I got a c-section. I had DS2 in two hours from first contraction to baby-in-arms. DS1 was OP, DS2 was positioned better and it clearly made all the difference.
GL!!!