Ok, so I would just like some clarification of the term "engaged" - but first here's my story...
I have a friend who is 40+1wks and has been told that the baby's head hasn't engaged at all (that is, bub is still free floating) and that means she is likely to need a caesar. (By the way, this is at a hospital where 4 of my other friends have been told the same thing - and ended up with C sections)
Now I know that it's quite common for babies heads to not engage till labour, (that happened to me with DD!) but does that mean that a baby can still be free floating then engage or does it have to be settled into the pelvis somewhat before properly "engaging"?!
Please wise ones, shed some light on this for me!!!
Thanks
I'm not absolutely sure about any of your questions, sorry, but I know my DD wasn't engaged at all when I was induced. It took almost 24hrs, but I gave birth vaginally. I'm pretty sure bubs doesn't 'need' to be engaged, my dr told me just the other day it doesn't matter that my baby isn't engaging and is up quite high, even at this late stage. I don't know if that helps
I am not engaged and am a "lady in waiting". My #1 was the only one to be engaged before going into labour. Although I don't know if bubs needs to be engaged to go into labour. All my bubs have been born naturally/vag. Will be interested to hear others stories.
Oh please! That sounds so silly! In saying that, I am no midwife or Ob. so could be wrong!
My first didn't engage until labour started. I was told on Wed that this bub has engaged but that it didnt' mean much except bubs was in a comfy position for birth...that it could 'un-engage' but it was unlikely.
I know, it sounds silly to me too - and I have been encouraging her to stand up for what she wants (to go into labour naturally!) but then I'm no expert - that's why I'm asking you guys!!
Head "engaged" question...
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks