My SIL is 39 weeks (yesterday), and has been diagonised with High blood pressure, but, i dont think its full blown pre-ecelempsia (sp??).. so, she was booked into have an induction via gels yesterday.
After waiting at home all day, she was told to come into hospital at 4pm, only to be sent home again, being told that they where 'to busy' to start the induction.
She went back this morning, and, about 7am, had her waters broken, and the drip inserted.. about 10.30 she had an epi, and, another one about 1ish, at which point she was 9cm dil.
I dont know.. it just doesnt seem right? My thoughts on having your waters broken and and the drip was that it would bring on labour hard & fast, but, to have a epi so soon afterwards, when, to my understanding (word of mouth, from DH via MIL) that contractions still far apart, and SIL still quite calm and relaxed, that the epi would in turn slow things back down again?
Yeah, that does sound strange to me.. not that I'm an expert or anything, but I did have my waters broken and was hooked up to the drip so I can say that I personally was roaring like a freight train within minutes...
I get what you mean, it sounds strange that they would go to all the effort of inducing labour just to slow it down with an epidural, unless your SIL specifically asked for it?? I wanted to avoid an epi at all costs and used gas and peth for pain relief, by the time I started screaming for an epi it was far too late to even contemplate (DD was born just a little while after I started demanding either epi or a c-sec lol).
Sorry, I'm not much help at all... but yeah, I don't see why they would have given her an epi unless she had asked for one.
I was induced and waters brocken and drip inserted and it was hard and fast and after 6 hrs I called for an epi as it was just to painfull and on top of each other - didnt slow the labour down though - you just cant feel it! Well thats what happened in my case - but I ended up with an emerg C-sect so who knows! HTH.
Seems a bit strange that she 'needed' an induction because of blood pressure, but the hospy were happy to make her wait til they were less busy. I guess if I were in that situation I would have just asked to be closely monitored if the blood pressure was a slight issue.
Ah well, what's done is done, and let's hope and pray that this results in a delivery with no further unnecessary intervention and a beautiful baby and happy mum at the end.
I had high blood pressure all the way through my 1st pregnancy at 40years of age ... and was closely monitored in case i ended up with pre-clampsia which i NEVER did end up having ... NO induction here was ever mentioned ... even when i went a little over my due date ... Natural vag birth & drug-free here ... Your SIL's situation doesn't seem right BUT maybe there was another reason ADDED to the concern of her high blood pressure that she hasn't told you about oR she was unclear about ?? Don't know ... just a guess
I had preeclampsia in my first pregnancy and was induced at 38 due to high blood pressure. My understanding is that an epidural reduces blood pressure during labour. I was not given one because my bp just got too high and other preeclampsia symptoms were showing up, so was given an emergengy c/s. I was however asked by a few people (including midwives) afterwards why they hadn't given me an epidural to try to keep my bp down.
I would assume in your SIL's case it was probably to control her blood pressure, especially if that was her only issue. Just a guess though.
Does this seem right??
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks