thread: 2nd birth predictions (after IOL)

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Registered User

    Oct 2007
    Middle Victoria
    8,924

    Question 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?

  2. #2
    Registered User

    Mar 2007
    6,900

    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

  3. #3
    Registered User

    Oct 2006
    Adelaide, SA
    3,962

    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!

  4. #4
    Registered User

    Aug 2008
    Ouiinslano
    5,303

    My SIL had IOL at 40 + 10 with DN1. 10 hour labour
    DN2 at 40 + 4, spontaneous labour, 6 hours active.

  5. #5
    Registered User

    Feb 2010
    on a big patch of paradise.
    3,720

    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.

  6. #6
    Registered User

    Jan 2009
    1,488

    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.

  7. #7

    May 2008
    Melbourne, Vic
    8,631

    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!

  8. #8
    2014 BellyBelly RAK Recipient.

    Mar 2008
    Vic
    4,806

    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.

  9. #9
    BellyBelly Life Subscriber

    Jan 2006
    11,633

    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.

  10. #10
    Registered User

    Feb 2008
    1,163

    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!

  11. #11
    Registered User

    Feb 2008
    140

    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

  12. #12
    Registered User

    Oct 2007
    Middle Victoria
    8,924

    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!
    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.

  13. #13
    2014 BellyBelly RAK Recipient.

    Oct 2007
    Outer South East Melbourne :)
    4,346

    i was induced with both my labours, DD1(39 weeks) with Gels only, DD2 (38+1) with AROM only. No synto was required for either labour.

    DD1's labour was 7hrs start to finish and DD2's was 5hrs start to finish.

    hth

  14. #14
    Registered User

    Oct 2007
    Middle Victoria
    8,924

    Re: 2nd birth predictions (after IOL)

    Looking through some old posts and found this one.

    My first (IOL) was 12 hours. Second birth (spontaneous) was around 4 hours. Baby #2 was in a better position, and i was in a safe place with trusted caregivers.

  15. #15
    Registered User

    Oct 2010
    Gold Coast
    2,638

    Re: 2nd birth predictions (after IOL)

    My waters broke with number1 and 9hrs later still no labour so synto drip started and 5hrs later and 2 pushes baby born (posterior birth)

    Number 2 labor started by itself and 1hr later and 3pushes baby born

  16. #16
    Registered User
    Add TeniBear on Facebook Follow TeniBear On Twitter

    Oct 2009
    Lalor, VIC
    5,051

    Re: 2nd birth predictions (after IOL)

    I think pain relief plays a part too, so I've included what I had

    DS - 6ish hours from first contraction to birth (gel IOL at 32w, gas & air/pethidine)

    DD1 - 19ish hours from first contraction to birth (gel IOL at 38w, augmented with synto ~10 hours in, gas & air/epidural)

    DD2 - Weak irregular contractions for roughly nine hours, then 4ish hours between start of "real" contractions and birth (natural spontaneous labour and birth at 40w)