Reply With QuoteMy first labour was 35+ hours ending in c/s at 40+12
My second was 10hrs from first contraction at 40 +2
I was expecting to be much more overdue and have a really long labour second time, was pleasantly surprised
Registered User
2nd birth predictions (after IOL)
i have heard general predictions that 2nd birth is often shorter than the first. Does this still apply if your first labour was induced and supplemented with syntocinon?
Interested in anecdotal evidence as well as any empirical evidence (sorry can't think of normal words today).
Also, if you had a longer pregnancy first time around was your 2nd pregnancy also longer?
Registered User
My first labour was 35+ hours ending in c/s at 40+12
My second was 10hrs from first contraction at 40 +2
I was expecting to be much more overdue and have a really long labour second time, was pleasantly surprised
Registered User
My first labour was induced with gels only and was 2 hours, very quick!
My second labour was spontaneous and was around 11 hours before I had to have an emergency c/s due to his position and size, DS2 was a whole kilo heavier than DS1!
So I guess be prepared for anything, I certainly wasn't prepared for anything going wrong based on my first labour, couldn't have been further from the truth!
Registered User
My SIL had IOL at 40 + 10 with DN1. 10 hour labour
DN2 at 40 + 4, spontaneous labour, 6 hours active.
Registered User
DD1 waters broke at 41wks. Had a few very sparse contractions, stained waters so drip started 6 hours later DD1 born. Good birth but a lot more painful.
DD2 Contractions started at 41+2 progressed slowly but steadily and 22.5 hours later DD2 was born. Much longer but such an amazing labor and birth.
Registered User
I only have anecdotal evidence to share.
My membranes ruptured at 36+4 with my 1st pregnancy. I was eventually induced/augmented with synto drip at 37 weeks. Labour was about 7 hours.
With my second pregnancy I went into spontaneous labour at 40+4 and had a glorious homebirth - 4.5 hours from first contraction to birth of my son.
Moderator
DD was born at 39+5, labor was 40hrs from first contraction to birth.
DS was born at 41, labor was 6hrs from first contraction to birth
My sis had her DD at 41+1, spontaneous, about 18hrs. Then she had her DS, induced at 42, about 12hrs.
HTH!
2014 BellyBelly RAK Recipient.
I can't give you info for me, obviously, but my mum went 7 days early for me, induced, about 8 hours, and went 7 days over for my brother, spontaneous (although she was in hospital waiting to be induced), and I think the time was about the same. I'll double check.
BellyBelly Life Subscriber
not for me.
1st IOL @ 42 weeks. About 8 hours from AROM to birth
2nd spontaneous @ 42+3. About 30 hours (9 hours active). But this was due to malpresentation.
Registered User
Theoretically I imagine second labours are shorter because the body has done it before and is 'primed' so to speak. I remember reading that in subsequent births, the hormones that induce labour are more effective because the receptors have been set by the first birth and it makes the whole process of hormonal response/birthing much more efficient. The body knows what it is doing IYKWIM.
The thing that might make it slower is a malpresentation as MadB mentioned or maybe a psychological barrier like an unresolved issue or a feeling of not being 'safe'. Then, you can't always bank on your psychological state slowing things down.
Based on that, I imagine that having had an induced and supplemented birth should not make a difference. Your body still went through the motions, still responded to the hormones, still had a good go!
Registered User
1st labour I was induced at 38 weeks 4 days with waters being broken and straight onto the synto drip - that labour was 9 1/2 hours
2nd labour was a spontaneous labour at 39 weeks and it lasted 15 hours
Registered User
It's a very interesting question - thanks for asking it, I'd been wondering the same thing. DD was induced at 38 weeks because of a non-reactive ctg, and was born a little over 4.5 hours later which my Dr said was very quick for a first birth. I'm sort of wondering if the length of time between babies for me will make Penguin's arrival a little more like a first birth than a subsequent one though..
Registered User
1st labour induction 3hrs 23mins at 38wks
2nd labour spontaneous 8.5hrs at 38wks 1 day
3rd labour spontaneous 49hrs (although long, it was a good labour) at 37wks 3days
4th labour induction due to fetal distress 1hr 4mins at 35wks
5th labour induction 3hrs 20mins at 37wks 3 days
6th labour induction 1hr 24mins at 38wks 1 day
7th labour induction 42mins at 38wks 1 day
I found my inductions quicker than my spontaneous labours. What i did notice though is, for me, my body seems to have a weight limit that it carries. All my spontaneous labours were the same weight within 60gm of each other (3200 to 3260gm).
Registered User
DS1 39+3weeks. Spontaneous labour. 24hrs
DS2 39weeks. Waters broke before any signs of labour. Induced as merconium (sp??) in my waters. Was having my own contractions before induction. 3hrs 13min.
DD 39+6weeks. Spontaneous labour. 2hrs 45min.
DS1 was long and i was ready to give up. I was constantly told that 2nd time would be quicker. But how much quicker???? Could have been 10hrs could have been 2?? But then induction was involved. With DD I was unsure what to expect as i didn't know how much of the induction was a part of my labour as by the time the induction begun i was in labour. In the end DD was quicker again.
Registered User
1st labour - 38 + 3 (ish) induced with synto after waters broke 15 hours prior, took 5hours of synto being turned up until anything happened then DD born 4 hours later with episiotomy and 3rd degree tear. Had pph - took ages to recover.
2nd labour - spontaneous labour at 39 + 5, serious contractions started at 7.30am and DD2 born at 11am, she was posterior and no tear, epi. Amazing recovery, we went to the supermarket and out for lunch on the way home from hossy. (A side note is I had diet controlled GD and had to have additional monitoring etc to avoid induction with #2). Very very grateful I had such a great experience).
Same hossy too.
Registered User
This is the thing i am trying to work out, are the hormones released and do they do the same thing if the labour is being controlled by artificial syntocinon? Would my receptors be activated by my first (induced) birth similarly to if it had been a natural labour?
I was induced at 41 weeks due to APH (bleeding), but was already at 4cm dilation when it was started. I didn't feel safe, and i know this probably slowed things down (cos i just wanted to go home) but the drip had to stay on for the whole time. The drip was going for 12 hours when bub was born.
So, my body has been through it, but if the drip was required the whole time, then i presume my hormonal stuff didn't kick in properly.
Registered User
I completely relate to that. For my first birth I am sure that I was doing well at home and was significantly dilated but things went backwards when I went in to hospital. I certainly felt stressed by some goings on and did not trust my carers. I absolutely believe that is one of the things that presented a challenge in my birth. (Good thing was that the IM support in my second birth was a totally different situation of trust and safety)
I am pretty sure that the hormones, although synthetic, act in the body in the same way and therefore set up the system for a more efficient subsequent birth. I am sure your midwife would be able to give you a researched opinion on this though. Plus, if you did get to 4cm, your own body was already doing it's thing. Surely this counts too??
Sorry, mine is only a lay person understanding so I don't think I am answering your question at all, but merely guessing and theorising along with you.
BellyBelly Life Subscriber
I guess hte receptors must have been activated in the same way, otherwise you wouldn't have dilated....?
Bookmarks