Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 18 of 32

Thread: Induction make it shorter?

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    5,756

    Default Induction make it shorter?

    Well i was induced with Lily because i had pre eclampsia. I only had a 5 hour labor but she was only my first. Would induction make labor shorter, or is it just that i have short labors?


  2. #2
    Kirsty77 Guest

    Default

    I'd have to say inductions don't make labour quicker as I was induced(gel) and went for 23 hours!I'd say yo have quick labours(lucky thing!)

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    QLD
    Posts
    3,068

    Default

    Hi Tegan

    If you was induced using an IV drip then yes it would make labour shorter and more painful

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    5,756

    Default

    Yeah i was given syntoconin(sp) but i really thought that the pain part was a breeze and i have 0 pain tolerence!

  5. #5
    skyelar Guest

    Default

    I was induced with my first as well due to pre eclampsia. I had a 5 hr labour which started a few hours after the 1st lot of gel.

    I was worried at first about being induced as I had heard all the horror stories about being fast & really painful. But really I'd rather fast & painful than loooooooong & painful anyday!!

    My Mum had a 4hr, a 2hr & a 45 min labour for her 3, so I am hoping I get the quick labour gene from her

    Skye

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    QLD
    Posts
    3,068

    Default

    Normally the gel is a lot slower than the drip they both work in different ways. The gel is also less painful. (if there is such a thing as less painful).

  7. #7
    mooshie Guest

    Default

    i had a 12hr labour with the drip
    a 7hr labour on my own
    then a 1hr labour with the gel :shock:

    so i am a bix mixed up there lol. i would say you would be in for short labours

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, Australia
    Posts
    8,980

    Default

    I am very anti-routine induction for reasons other than the mother's or baby's health. Just my own opinion though, no offence intended. I think it's important and healthy for the baby to choose it's own birth date where there are no problems, as the medicines used in induction effect the baby. The contractions are harder and more frequent, sometimes on top of each other in an induction. Just hypothetically, imagine being dunked underwater where there is no oxygen. It would be okay for a short time. Imagine being continually dunked under there and for longer with no or little breaks. The contractions of the uterus reduce the blood supply hence the oxygen to the baby. For some this will result in fetal distress. This will often result in medical carers suggesting an emergency caesar or other things like that. Once you are on the drip, they will tell you you can't get off it because there is the chance the labour will stop. That's what they will say.

    Yes, many inductions go on without an apparent hitch, but like Shannon, I was augmented and would NEVER go through that again not on the basis of the knoweldge I have now, but I vowed that as soon as I had birthed Marisa. The pain was constant, intense and I don't want to go there again. There are natural things you can do to help, I think these should be the only port of call unless something happens which requires intervention. Every labour is also different and pain can be from all sorts of things, baby's position, mum's position... my convenience will always come second to my baby's needs - I would just hope for my baby's entrance into the world to be as gentle and welcoming as possible.

    Just my 2c - but we are all entitled to our own choices and decisions of course.
    Kelly xx

    Creator of BellyBelly.com.au, doula, writer and mother of three amazing children
    Author of Want To Be A Doula? Everything You Need To Know
    Follow me in 2015 as I go Around The World + Kids!
    Forever grateful to my incredible Mod Team and many wonderful members who have been so supportive since 2003.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    5,756

    Default

    I'm sorry, i don't mean to sound rude but to me it sounded like you are saying i had a choice whether to be induced or not. Which i didn't because i had pre eclampsia. Unless you weren't talking to me at all, then never mind, lol.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, Australia
    Posts
    8,980

    Default

    Definitely not for pre-eclampsia, I made a general comment about routine induction
    Kelly xx

    Creator of BellyBelly.com.au, doula, writer and mother of three amazing children
    Author of Want To Be A Doula? Everything You Need To Know
    Follow me in 2015 as I go Around The World + Kids!
    Forever grateful to my incredible Mod Team and many wonderful members who have been so supportive since 2003.

  11. #11

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    5,756

    Default

    Yep that is fine.

    So looks like i am not going to know if my labors are shorter until next time because it's half and half at the moment lol.

  12. #12

    Default

    I am with Kelly on this. I have been induced twice, once with pre-eclampsia and a possible IUGR (intra-uterine growth restriction) the 2nd just for possible IUGR. Both of the boys were born above the IUGR threshold (only just for Kam mind you but he was in the world 2wks early).

    If I happened to fall pregnant again I don't wish to be induced again (even if they threw IUGR at me) unless the life of either myself or my unborn child was at risk. They have worked out why I have small kids so hopefully IUGR wouldn't be a factor for a 3rd time as they know the reasoning behind it.

    Labour wise. Kam was 3hrs 20 mins. Lach was 4hrs 6 mins. Kam I had the drip and gel done twice, Lach I only had the gel done once

    Love

  13. #13
    *Yvette* Guest

    Default

    I was induced for the first time with the twins. My first 3 kids were 12 to 13 hours, and the twins labour was exactly the same. I was initially induced by ARM only though, the sytocinon drip being put up in the last 2 hours.

    They always say it's medically necessary, and of course for some it really is. No-one wants to put their baby in any danger.

    For anyone who's considering induction though & they're not convinced it's really necessary, I'd think long & hard about it & avoid it if possible.

    In hindsight I would never agree to the ARM or the drip again (in my circumstances). It made such a huge difference to the pain & my ability to cope with it.

  14. #14

    Default

    OH I had ARM in both of mine as well. One at 2cm the other at 7cm, I think a couple of more contractions and the 7cm would have gone themselves cause it was feeling like all my insides were about to fall out lmao.

    Love

  15. #15
    *Yvette* Guest

    Default

    I suppose the ARM affects people differently. My waters don't break naturally til very close to the birth, & babies heads don't engage til well into labour, so maybe it was more of a big deal for me, or maybe it was because of twins. Even the more natural birth thinking of the midwives didn't seem to think ARM was a big deal, but it was to me. I'm sure it affected me psychologically as well as physically.

  16. #16

    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, Australia
    Posts
    8,980

    Default

    It seems the mentality with ARM is if it's not broken, break it... but you can refuse it. From memory at the National Doula Conference, someone said that there is no study with proof to show that having the waters broken makes a labour shorter. It might do, but it might not, there is no proof. It also introduces more opportunity for infection and puts you on the clock - they wont allow waters to be broken for a certain amount of time before moving things along even more with other intervention due to infection risk. Waters left to break on their own normally break at second stage (pushing). Also if broken and baby has the cord tightly around it's neck, the pressure is only going to be even more without the waters there for the cord to 'float' in.

    I had my waters broken at 5cms with Marisa with a drip put up also due to a slow labour and with Elijah, they broke it when I got in at 9cms. When a woman is doing beautifully, why interfere? I also hear more and more so many women are given epidurals and the like when they are so close, even 9cms - where has the care gone? This woman is so close, yet some doctors think they have to just 'fix' it or 'save' the woman so she thinks he / she is their hero. When she has done it all herself.
    Kelly xx

    Creator of BellyBelly.com.au, doula, writer and mother of three amazing children
    Author of Want To Be A Doula? Everything You Need To Know
    Follow me in 2015 as I go Around The World + Kids!
    Forever grateful to my incredible Mod Team and many wonderful members who have been so supportive since 2003.

  17. #17

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    QLD
    Posts
    3,068

    Default

    I once and only once had a baby born without the waters breaking. I had to remove the membranes from the baby after the head was born. With hindsight I wish now that I had let the mother remove the membranes after birth.
    Kelly I have to disagree with you on one point. And this will be the first time that I have not agreed with everything that you have said. The problem with the cord being tightly around the neck is pressure on the cord caused by contractions and thus cutting the blood supply to the baby. If the cord is tight enough to do this then no amount of fluid will make any difference because the cord would not be able to float. I think that this would be more of a problem if the cord was loosely around the neck as then with fluid the cord could float but without fluid then there is more potential for the cord not to move away from not only the neck but form the limbs also.
    I do agree however re the medical interventions. Once you start down this path then it can often cascade into more and more interventions.

  18. #18

    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, Australia
    Posts
    8,980

    Default

    LOL Alan it's okay I happily welcome any other comments or wake-ups LOL! There was a point one of the speakers made at the National Doula conference, in regards to the cons of having waters broken, and she mentioned that if you already have a baby with a tight cord around the neck, then it could make it worse. I know it is very common for the cord to be there anyway. I'd better re-read my posts LOL I think this 42C heat is going to my head I guess she was wrong then because what you say makes more sense to me! 8-[ :-k
    Kelly xx

    Creator of BellyBelly.com.au, doula, writer and mother of three amazing children
    Author of Want To Be A Doula? Everything You Need To Know
    Follow me in 2015 as I go Around The World + Kids!
    Forever grateful to my incredible Mod Team and many wonderful members who have been so supportive since 2003.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •