How Long Would You Be Prepared to be Pregnant For?

Okay, I read something interesting earlier and was wondering where BB members stood on this issue.

Say you are healthy, your baby is healthy... how long would you wait for your baby to be born? This is taking into account that you may get pressure from doctors and midwives, you may be tired, but also considering on what you know is best for baby.

I realise this poll may be flawed, with those post dates or over pregnancy already compared to those of us who aren't but anyway... try to go on what you believe! :)

If bub is perfectly healthy and happy and I am healthy (not necessarily happy hehe because by that time you're so over it) then I would just wait it out. Bub can't stay in there forever and for a matter of a few days or a cpl weeks I would prefer to wait it out rather than have intervention. That's just me personally.

My first thought was um DUH, til the baby comes!! But I have never had to face induction so that side of it never crossed my mind!!

I am 37 weeks and ready! Saying that if I wasn't faced with the chance of losing my VBAC I would wait till at least 42weeks.

Well i have to put >43 weeks as I have gone longer than 42 already. I rather not if there were some way to convince baby to be more timely, though.

I would wait until I had a baby, LOL. I would not be induced if everything was fine especially after having a c/s. DD1 was born at 40+12 and I hadn't discussed induction. I told them I'd like monitoring if I got to 42 weeks. Luckily everything was going well for both my pregnancies so my babies were able to come when they were ready.

I personally wouldn't go any longer than 41 weeks, that's just me, based on my own personal experiences. It's just one of my things - I've had an induction, I know what I'm in for, and I've had a baby go post-EDD and end up with spontaneous labour (beat my booked induction by one day, which was scheduled for 41+2) but severe placental deterioration, so I'd much rather have an induction post-dates than leave it up to fate - how many stories have I read about mums who were waiting, waiting patiently, being monitored as appropriate, and had their precious little one pass in utero... I just couldn't take the risk, especially knowing that with my last baby, seeing it with my own eyes, that if she'd not been born within 24 hours of when she was, there was a very, very good chance that she would have been one of those. And being in a regional area with an under-resourced and under-staffed hospital, I have no faith in the system being able to monitor me as needed. If I ever have another baby, and go post-dates, I will be booking an induction for 41 weeks no questions asked. That's what I feel safe with, and what works for my body, my baby and I :)

it's a hard one. Provided baby was very healthy and I had great care, is say 43 weeks. I would hope not to get to that though! My mum was born at 43+3 and me and my sibling were all around the 42 -42.5 week mark. So being overdue in our family is pretty normal.

Sent from my GT-S5570 using Tapatalk

Doh, I clicked the wrong one!!

With having a c/s last time at 34 weeks, I'd want to go for a natural labour. I can't imagine being pregnant soooo long, I was over it by 30 weeks last time!
But, provided the little one is doing fine, then I wouldn't book in for my c/s (I'm assuming an induction is off the cards) til 42 weeks.
And do everything in my power to bring on labour before that!

I was determined to let DS choose his birthday, and I think he was trying. But being posterior, my labour would start, go all night, then stall. I think he was getting a bit stuck. This went on for a week. At 41 weeks exactly my hindwaters started leaking so I thought I'd beaten induction. I resisted for 3 days, waiting for my labour to become established, getting around with broken waters. On the fourth day I went ahead with induction.

In hindsight, I should have allowed them to admit me to the ward, give me antibiotics, and kept waiting. DS was in no danger, I was fine and coping. I don't know why they were so eager to induce me. Next time, I'll refuse until it's actually neccesary.

Providing it was a normal pregnancy with no other risk factors like previous c-sect and both Bub and myself were healthy and doing fine I would wait until 42 weeks - after that (knowing my personality) I would want the baby out and would be asking for an induction

You need an option "until the baby is born"! I'm happy to be monitored until baby is ready to come out, just to ensure it's all still ticking along, but I haven't really thought about an expiry date for this baby's time in my womb. ;)

As long as I knew the conception date pretty accurately, 42 weeks (which is the stage we got to with DS heading for a VBAC), because although there is conflicting evidence, a lot of studies do show that there is increased risk after that. Hard to say what I would do if I didn't know conception date though as that few weeks could make a difference.

Well I went with 41 weeks, but to be specific 10 days past EDD is my max. I've read and been told by Dr's that after 10 days the % of intra-utero death increases so I would just be panicking after that.

Having said that, my babies came DD1 2 days early and DD2 right on her EDD, so I haven't had to face it, but I was prepared to go 10 days over with DD2 as I was hoping she'd get a bit fatter if I did, as long as I was monitored continuously. (Maybe I'm a bit more paranoid than some though, DD1 was IUGR and no-one even knew about it, so think fundal height measurements is a crock, and worrying my babies are starving inside me doesn't make one want to prolong their birth.)

I went with >43 weeks, possibly in blissful ignorance of what it's like to be more than 6 weeks pregnant :) As long as I received frequent monitoring and there were no problems with either of us, I'm happy for bub to pick it's day.

That may all change once I'm actually pregnant though, I do tend to be quite a nervous person.

Having my DD come by herself 2 weeks early i'm not sure if i would ever be faced with the choice of being induced but hypothetically i would be willing to wait until 41 weeks, any later than that i would be paranoid something would go wrong.

With family history of being 2+ weeks late, I'm expecting to go over the 40 week mark. I'm comfortable with 41, but I don't think I'll be happy to let it go past 42, I'd be too anxious about something going wrong.

I haven't voted in the poll yet because, honestly, I just don't know. I like to think that babies are meant to choose their own birthday, and I would hate the thought of ever needing to be induced, but there just seems to be so much that might come into the equation.

For me, both my babies came in their 37th week, so I've never experienced being "over due". My son's placenta was "gritty" already, and I was told that is seen more commonly in over due babies when the placenta is starting to breakdown (or something along those lines). So I have to wonder, if he stayed in my tummy longer, was there a risk that the placenta could have failed him? So that makes me wonder if in a normal pregnancy that has gone overdue, is there a greater risk of placenta problems the longer the baby stays in the tummy? I just don't know.

Also, I sometimes wonder about the risk of induction vs. the risk of a potential c-section if the baby grows too much during the extra time in the womb. Obviously induction can lead to a cascade of interventions, but is there a greater chance of a c-section if the baby has grown too big? Again, I'm just putting the question out there because I honestly don't know, and not because I think that big babies can't be born vaginally. Even my 37-weekers were 8lb10oz and 8lb3oz, so not exactly tiny, lol.

I start to feel uneasy after 41 weeks. The WHO say that induction post 41 weeks correlates to less perinatal death. I went post dates with Dd2 and 3. I was fortunate to be able to be able to have daily monitoring though. I was around 40+10 with DD2 and 41 weeks when I went into labour with DD3. I was booked for an induction at my request for 40+10 for each. But managed to go into labour before then. (dd1 was induced early due to PE)

I wouldn't be induced. (and can't anyway - and won't cos I'm not having any more babies...)

But I would go until the baby is ready to come - be it 43 weeks or what - AS LONG AS I had good care with frequent monitoring.

I believe DD1 was very close to being one of those "statistics" being born at 42 weeks.

I said 42 weeks. The antenatal midwife I had with DD had a good discussion with me about the best time to induce post dates (resulting from me saying being post dates alone wasn't enough reason to induce) and there is some evidence of adverse outcomes after 42 weeks so I think I'd get too stressed going much further. But then, I'd want to be pretty certain of conception dates too.

Having said that, DD was born 10 days early so I've never even gone to 40.

I said 43 weeks but I would only be happy to do so with extra monitoring in the form of scans and extra midwife visits. If anything started to seem off and I hadn't gone into labour I would accept having my waters broken and if that didn't work, a CS. I can't envisage a situation where I would ever accept a chemical induction.

with both mine i went to 42 weeks on the dot...had a stretch and sweep at 41+6 and had both at 42. BUT if i didnt have to deal with doctors telling me i was terrible for attemping to harm my child by going past 41+ weeks then id wait longer. :)

Very hard question to answer having gone into spontaneous labour with my DD at 38w. I wasn't over it or anything at that point, was thinking I would go past 40w being my first but who knows how I would have felt at 40w and beyond. I said beyond 43w and that would be with monitoring to ensure health of both baby and myself but I can't really know for sure.

Wow I'm surprised that >43 weeks is ahead, I read so much about induction I would have guessed that >43 weeks would be coming in last :confused: I was the most comfortable in the 3rd tri and was 11 days over although I was booked in to be induced at 42 weeks by my own choice. Our OB was supportive of our choices either way.

I dont know if psychologically I could make it to 40weeks. I've had one induction and hated it and one spontaneous labour I loved until it ended badly. I am aware that the normal gestation for humans is 39+ weeks after conception, so 41 weeks LMP. But logic doesnt come into it. If I can make a healthy, live baby I will keep them in as long as possible but suspect my mental health will be the deciding factor. Ideally, bub will cooperate and come spontaneously LOA at 38-39 weeks and be perfectly healthy.

If you calculate the EDD based on Naegele’s Rule it is VERY flawed. I'm writing an article on it at the moment, its very interesting researching it. The rule was 'devised' by a botanist in the 1700s and he said it was 10 lunar months based on observational studies (I believe of a small number), an Ob then made it public (and gave it his name) in the 1800s. But there are issues with it, like you have to have a 28 day cycle with ovulation on day 14 for starters.

I'm not surprised by the poll results so far, I think if anything it made me smile. Just reinforces to me how much BB members trust their bodies and love to be educated and empowered :D

I would go 42-43 weeks and even then if things where still looking fine and bub was happy I would be happy ( but very impatient) to wait. My first bub according to my dates was 3w 3d over and from the u/s at 20 weeks (not as accurate 16 years ago) I was 10 days over...it was spontaneous labour all natural in the birthing centre.
I was over it but was happy for her to choose her own birth date.



---
- Sent from my iPad

:

---

I personally wouldn't go any longer than 41 weeks, that's just me, based on my own personal experiences. It's just one of my things - I've had an induction, I know what I'm in for, and I've had a baby go post-EDD and end up with spontaneous labour (beat my booked induction by one day, which was scheduled for 41+2) but severe placental deterioration, so I'd much rather have an induction post-dates than leave it up to fate - how many stories have I read about mums who were waiting, waiting patiently, being monitored as appropriate, and had their precious little one pass in utero... I just couldn't take the risk, especially knowing that with my last baby, seeing it with my own eyes, that if she'd not been born within 24 hours of when she was, there was a very, very good chance that she would have been one of those. And being in a regional area with an under-resourced and under-staffed hospital, I have no faith in the system being able to monitor me as needed. If I ever have another baby, and go post-dates, I will be booking an induction for 41 weeks no questions asked. That's what I feel safe with, and what works for my body, my baby and I :)

---

Ditto.

If I could, I'd be pregnant for five years and give birth shortly before school started. (I went into labour at 42w by their counting, 40 by mine, and they were very cross I'd waited so long without going for an induction.)

Pregnancy rocked. Sleepless nights with a pre-schooler don't.

I have never gone over 40 weeks so i am not speaking form expereince.

Althouhg speaking from my experiences my patience would struggle to make it to the 42ish week mark but i would hope that if there were no reasons to induce earlier i could have made it that long. As long as i have regular monitoring...

I've already gone 42 weeks so no big deal for me to go as long as it takes provided I had frequent monitoring. I found with both DDs that the only time I felt anywhere close to decent throughout pregnancy was after about 38 weeks, so I don't mine being very pregnant. Just wish there was a way I could skip from conception to 39 weeks!

i went 40 weeks 4 days and id had enough lol

i personally would not go any longer than 42 weeks. i would not be comfortable with leaving the baby any longer than that.

Because I medically can't give birth naturally, I wouldn't expect to go past my due date, health issues and such. But that's just for me personally. And I know that I'll be having a c-section on the due date for this bubba.

If I didn't have the problem that I do have, and given that bubba was healthy and nothing wrong, I wouldn't object to going as far as 42wks


---
- Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - even though I should be cleaning ;)

This is an interesting topic...

I am 32yrs old, and out of all of my friends and family who have had babies in the last 5-10 years, none have been willing to let their babies go past 10 days overdue (many have said they would in the early stages of pregnancy, but have then ended up being induced or with elective c-sections). it is an extraordinarily difficult task to be able to achieve a "post-dates" delivery in this day and age, primarily as society's opinion is that if you let your baby go past 42 wks, you're really being extremely irresponsible!! my father is a doctor (nothing to do with obstetrics), and i think he thought i was a mad raging hippee!! i am not.
My first baby arrived 11 days late, and my second arrived 21 days late. early pregnancy tests were taken (before my period was even missed), and i had some early scans, so we are very confident that my EDD was "correct".
I did not WANT to be pregnant for so long (of course I would have loved the babies to have arrived at 37 wks!) - and was well and truly over the whole thing by about 40wks both times, but i also really wanted to avoid an induction, so let my babies decide their own arrival dates (and yes, i went with a private OB in a private hospital, albeit i had done my research in advance and chosen a "low intervention" OB)...
my first baby was PERFECTLY cooked. she was the picture of health - alert and tracking people around the room from the moment she arrived. my son was admittedly a little "over-cooked"!! his skin was a mess and he began to shed it like a hibernating snake!! he was also very strong and alert though.
I am pregnant now for the 3rd time. I have moved states (from VIC to WA) since having my last baby, and found it VERY difficult to find an OB who will let me go past 42 weeks (even though you would think that my own obstetric history, and perfectly normal, intervention-free births and healthy babies would SUPPORT my argument!). i finally found one, and am travelling a long way from home to deliver for the sole reason that i want the freedom to choose to go past 42wks (with appropriate monitoring of placental function, fluid levels, etc). i originally wanted to go to the family birth centre (which is right near my home), but they will not accept mothers who have passed 42wks, so i would be transferred to the main public maternity ward in any case, and i was worried about getting lumped with a poorly trained obstetric resident or registrar in the case of an emergency, instead of being about to choose my own ob... this pregnancy has been extremely taxing on me, and i really hope that this baby is a little more punctual than the others, but at the end of the day, given that both of my other babies (and myself) have made it through birth unscathed (well, as unscathed as one can be with a 9lb 7oz human emerging from one's nether regions!!), then i really hope that i have the strength to wait it out this time again, and let nature decide the date of my baby's arrival, and most importantly, to ward off very seductive offers from medical staff to get the baby out in a more timely manner!!