I just found out my Mum's labours were 2.5, 3.5 and 4.5 hrs, literally from the first contraction to birth. The longest one was also a breech delivery so would have been shorter if not for that.
DD was an elective c-section as she was breech. So with this bubba I have no idea what to expect. But am wondering if there's a link between labour times between the generations?!?
My sister, 12 hours, then 8 hours followed by an emergency ceasar, my niece had her little arm hanging out of my sisters vagina and couldn't be delivered safely vaginally. (I'm sure there's a nicer way to say that,but I've had a couple of wines and my brain is on minimal function!)
Nope, my Mum had long labours. I was 28 hours (posterior) and my sisters were 23 hours (though breech so ended up having a c-section as she just wouldn't come out) and 18 hours (c-section as Mum didn't fully dilate) from memory. My labour was 3 hours. (5 hours from the time of AROM)
My mum had super fast labours all under three hours. She would get a show and go to the hospital and wait for the labour to begin. With my birth, she lost her plug went to the hospital and waited. After a few hours he contractions started and I was born in 30 minutes from first contraction to baby.
I have had three babies and my longest labour has been two hours from first contraction to baby. My shortest labour was 50 minutes from first contraction to baby. Unlike my mum I have no signs labour will begin at all. Its straight into it.
My sisters on the other hand (same mother) have both had very long LOOOOOOOONG labours. 36 hours long for example. So who knows!!!
I don't think there is any link between generations. Same in regards to going into labour. I.e my mum was 3 weeks early with all ofher pregnancies so I am going to go into labour early as well. Different woman, different body IYKWIM.
my mum was about 6hrs with me. not sure about brother 1.
brother 2 tho..she was in hospital for 3 months because she srom at 18weeks. she was on a bunch of stuff to stop labour but at 34weeks she went to the nurses desk to ***** about the shower and it was only because the nurses knew her so well they clued something was wrong and started panicing and grabbed her and put her in the lift and she then started pushing in the lift and JUST made it to the birth room. she didnt even know she was in labour. so yes...extremely quick
Mum's were 8, 4, 38mins - all with waters breaking and contractions not long after. The 4th was twins and dictated epidural so not active during labour at all and was < 4 hours with twins arriving about 10 minutes apart.
Mine have been so far 6.5 active (from waters breaking, 18 from first contraction, but all prodromal labour), and second 3h45m from waters, 2hr50m from contractions.
I am a little anxious about the idea of the next given my mums history and how hard and fast my second was; and it will more than likely be a planned homebirth.
The wives tale would suggest there is a link. My mum had 4 births and they were all very quick 4hrs or less I think. We went to the hospital before things stated to heat up (I was 10 days over so knew it was labour) we got to the hospital and DS was born 2 hours and 40 minutes later.. . We have taken a guess at when the waves (contractions) would have been 5 minutes apart but we estimate that the labour was only about 3 hours and 20 minutes. As for the 'intense' part, that was only about 45mins the midwife told me.
Me (38w, spontaneous labour) - Around five hours.
Brother #1 (34w, spontaneous) - About an hour AFAIK. I'm pretty sure she said she went into labour at lunchtime, and he was born at 1:30.
Brother #2 (38w, spontaneous) - Three hours at most. He was born around midnight, and Mum wasn't in labour when we went to bed that night.
My labours:
Ianto (32w, induced) - About five hours from first contraction.
Amelia (38w, induced) - Eighteen hours from first contraction.
Yes! First one was fast but not super fast, I think it went for several hours but the business end was pretty quick, one of those 'no I've only just done an internal you won't be ready to push - oh there you go your baby is coming now' kinda situations. Not sure how long it was for me (second labour) but I remember her saying I was really convenient she just woke up in the morning, got ready and went to hospital and had me and my time of birth was before 9am so I think only a couple hours. 3rd labour was about 20-25 minutes (and the drive to the next town to the hospital was about 20-25 minutes!).
Me: 2.5 hours and 4.5 hours. With both the business end (the part that you REALLY know you are in labour!) was quick, DD1 was about 1.5 hours from 2-3 cms to fully dilated. DD2 would have been a similar time maybe a bit shorter but I never had an internal or that kind of detail so the I don't really have an accurate time that it was clocked at.
My mum and her 2 sisters and their mum all had fast labours. I think my mum's longest was her first at around 6 hours. I was the quickest of her three babies at just 1 hour. I was the second baby. My aunty holds the record between them though, her second child was born in 20 minutes!
My sister had a 5 hour labour with her first DS and 2 hours with her second DS so speedy too really.
I too had quick labours DD1 was a tough posterior labour but it was only 6 hours of established labour. DD2 literally flew out - she was born in 37 minutes! Both my girls came spontaneously at 38+5 and 38+4.
My OB always said that fast labours are one thing that is often hereditary. We have already discussed possibly breaking my waters early with our third baby to avoid a roadside/car park birth.
Reply With Quote
Registered User
Did your Mum have fast labours?
DD1 was a tough posterior labour but it was only 6 hours of established labour. DD2 literally flew out - she was born in 37 minutes!
Both my girls came spontaneously at 38+5 and 38+4.
Bookmarks