- Pregnancy
- Baby & Toddler
- Parents
- Getting Pregnant
- Baby Names
- Product Reviews
-
Registry
- Community
-
More
Want a personalized experience?
Download the free app
Natural Birth
starrysmile18
member
Cons to being induced?
starrysmile18
member
Can you please enlighten me? I'm 32 weeks, and today my OB talked to me about inducing after 41 weeks, if baby waits that long...
I'm really wanting everything to be natural, and to NOT be induced, but it may have to happen. What are the negitives to this? Have you been induced?
~~~ EDD for Baby #2 6/28/15~~~~
This discussion has been closed.
Re: Cons to being induced?
Inductions have higher c-section rates. Labour is often more intense and painful. There will be more pressure to get an epidural. Labour is on more of a clock with an induction - once they start, they don't want to admit failure so will often just keep ramping up dosages to force the birth.
It has to be balanced against the baby's health, though. After 41w you'd get NST tests to see how the baby is doing; there can come a time where the placenta stops working efficiently or amniotic fluid is low and it becomes more risky to wait on labour naturally occurring. There are some middle of the road induction techniques, like sweeping membranes or foley catheter that can sometimes be tried before drug techniques.
Natural Birth Board FAQs
Cloth Diaper Review Sheet
What PP said. Also--new study with some data on c-section rates and all that jazz: https://health.usnews.com/health-news/news/articles/2012/03/09/when-unneeded-induced-labor-may-increase-complications (unfortunately they don't get into detail about what they considered medical reasons for induction--ie, if simply going past due date was medical or if it was only considered a necessary induction if baby or mom was in distress/had complications--been trying to find a link to the original study).
Also, a good article exploring the reasoning for the 41 week rule and the evidence behind it (and a little on the lack of evidence behind it, too): https://evidencebasedbirth.com/2012/05/03/if-you-dont-have-this-baby-by-42-weeks-we-have-to-induce/
Token gave great information.
I was induced. My water broke spontaneously but contractions did not start after 12+ hours. I said yes to the Pitocin at 13 hours and I feel like it was all down hill from there.
I labored without meds until the doctor did the next internal, about 6 hours. That internal was so God-awful that I begged for the drugs. Honestly, the Pit contractions I could handle, but the internals were horrible. I had two doses of Stadol before I gave in and decided on the epi after another horrendous internal.
Basically, inductions makes it harder to refuse the pain meds. The staff watch you a lot more closely and the contractions are a lot more painful. It can absolutely be done and there are plenty of women who have done it. Personally, I will avoid induction at all costs with any future pregnancies.
Great article! Never read that one before.
I was induced because LO was running out of fluid and in danger. I had a 24 hour labor (incredible nurses helped me and supported my wishes for a natural birth). We went 20 hours naturally (they worked with me and took me off the pit once my body started going on its own) and I did a lot of work to get DD into a good position (roller ball, squatting, walking, etc). I was terrified of being induced and strongly opposed to an epidural, but I have an antiverted uterus and with four hours to go, I couldn't relax enough for LO to come out, given the position of the uterus. I had an epi at the 20th hour. I was able to relax enough to sleep for two hours and began pushing right away when I woke up. Everything went great from there. She was out in 30 minutes because I had done so much work before the epi. I tore slightly, but the doc respected my wishes to avoid the episiotimy.
I think, if you absolutely must be induced, have good people around you who can support you in being "as natural as possible" and go from there.
I had two med-free births followed by an induction. My Dr. was great with me going longer than 1 week over as long as we did the NST's and fluid checks past the 40w mark (I had already been having NST's for quite a while....). But at 41w6d we saw a decrease in fluids so she sent me right to the hospital.
I'm sure every person's experience is different when comparing the two (as are most things in the baby department), but for me, being induced was horrible and led me getting an epidural. I was already 4cm when I was started and she broke my water and started me on thee smallest dose of pitocin. Labor started within 30 minutes, if not less, and it got intense FAST. Not only that, but the pain was much more sharp and severe (maybe because there was no cushion from the bag of waters anymore??) and I just could. not. stay. relaxed through the contractions, which is vital when you are trying to get your body to dilate. Knowing my typical progress rate, I knew that I was stalling because my body was too tense so I decided to get the epi and went from a 6-10 in 30 minutes and pushed him out in 2 contractions. I know that given my situation an epidural was the right choice. Do I wish I wouldn't have had an induction? Sure. But it was what it was and we needed to keep baby safe, both before labor and during.
I would talk to you dr. about letting you go past 41w but with extra monitoring. Even an extra 3 or 4 days could be all it takes to let baby decide to come on his own.
I agree with all pp about reasons not to be induced BUT wanted to say that I was induced for health reasons and, this being my first so nothing to compare it to, I found it totally doable and kind of feel like, if this is so bad, then non-induced natural labor must be a piece of cake! I had cervadil followed by pitocin, hung out on a yoga ball for quite a while, a few hours of unpleasant to pretty intense contractions, in the midst of which they broke my water, about 30 minutes of pushing and she was born. As they were cleaning me and LO up, I told DH "that wasn't that bad, I'd do it again."
This is not to discredit those who had horrible inductions or to say "oh, it's fine" - I just want you to not be scared/convinced you'll never be able to do it if you DO have to be induced. Definitely do your homework on natural and medical induction methods, as well as pain-management technicques, have a long conversation with your doctor and with your nurse once you're at the hospital, if your nurse is not supportive, ask for another one, and have supportive people around you.
Our doula was induced and still made it through with no meds, but she said she's not going to lie: it hurt. Pitocin does block some of your body's natural pain killers, so on top of the more intense contractions, you do have less natural resources to work with.
I think a lot depends on the woman too - we all react differently to meds (it's too bad we can't always predict what our case will be!). According to Ina May, petite women can often have more intense contractions with faster labors. I watched my petite sister endure very intense contractions without pitocin and although she was struggling to progress naturally, she needed an epi before receiving pitocin, no doubt to help her relax (she finally progressed w/the epi and pitocin combo). I am very, very similar to her in build, muscle tension, inability to relax easily etc so my mindset is that if induction is medically necessary than the epi will come with it.
That said, I am trying to avoid induction at all costs for this very reason (whereas I truly believe some women can handle the induction pain-med-free). And pp's are right, the c-section rate is higher. 
Regarding dating the pregnancy, I wish OB's would give us to 42 weeks. For example, according to MY NFP charts, baby could arrive as late as Sept. 12th and be "on time" (NOT late) but my ultrasound due date is Sept. 6th. I hate that the ultrasound due date "cuts off" a week automatically. I am going to pull out my charts and show my OB why I really want the extra time if needed to go into labor naturally.