Printable View
Hi guys,
Just another question, when I had DS 15 months ago, I was induced and in labour for 24 hours and then had a vaccuum extraction. I have since read that being induced can make your labour longer, and it also makes your contractions a lot more intense. I was just wondering what you all think?
I was induced with Nina. I was told to expect the contractions to knock me for six (which they did, started off being 2 minutes, and stayed that way for 9 hours!) and to expect a short'ish labour (it was 9 hours in total).
I was induced with zaccie & they knocked me too, they were horrific, not that they aren't anyway, but they were heaps more intense, Zaccie arrived only 2 hours after the first contraction.
Not every woman will have this happen though, so don't panic too much!!
Was induced with bubby#1 and told that I would have my first set of gels that night, then sent to my room to sleep and would be woken up in 6 hours for them to do the second set of gels and not to expect baby until mid to late afternoon the next day. Within 45mins of the first gels, the contractions hit me for a six and by 7am the next morning my bubby was born!!
The ob put it down to bubby was almost ready to come out anyways and just needed a kick start (according to my cycle dates she was already a full 2 weeks overdue)....some kick start!!!!! :p
BUT! I agree with storm.......every woman's experience is different so what happens with one may not happen with another iykwim ;)
I would say yes, having had two spontaneous births and one synctocinon induced one (the drip) the intensity of the contractions were so much worse than a 'normal' one and I felt that I didn't have as much control over them. The labour lasted for 4.5hrs, which I felt was too fast considering the size and postion of the baby.
But then like Jo said, this will not be the case for every woman.
I am starting to get the impression that your first birth turned out the way it did through a cascade of intervention and mis-management - induced labour, prolonged labour and ultimately instrument delivery. I also think that if you do plenty of research into optimal fetal positioning, birth positions and natural induction methods (if needed) then you can have a totally different and better experience this time around.
ETA - here is a list of books that you may find very helpful https://www.bellybelly.com.au/birth/...ding-for-birth
This is not my experience but a friends. She was well overdue and was induced with gels. She had previously had her son naturally with no help but this was for bubba number 2. As soon as she was induced, her contractions started and were more intense and her labour was very fast. She felt like it didnt give her enought time to deal with the pain comapred to if it was slower. She had her bubs within 3 hours.
I am one of the weird people who had the opposite happen ... I was induced with the syntocinon drip, and after 7 hrs (when they'd nearly turned the drip up as high as it was allowed), I was having contractions that could be seen on the monitor, but I could barely feel them, and they were completely painless.
My cervix wasn't dilating at all though, so I'm not sure if that had anything to do with my non-existent pain levels.
https://www.bellybelly.com.au/birth/...-or-not-induce
:
“Synthetic oxytocin (oxytocin is the labour hormone) administered in labor does not act like the body’s own oxytocin. First, Pitocin-induced contractions are different from natural contractions, and these differences can have significant effects on the baby. For example, waves can occur almost on top of each other when too high a dose of Pitocin is given, and it also causes the resting tone of the uterus to increase.
Such over-stimulation (hyperstimulation) can deprive the baby from the necessary supplies of blood and oxygen, and so produce abnormal FHR (fetal heart rate) patterns, fetal distress (leading to cesarean section), and even uterine rupture.
Birth activist Doris Haire describes the effects of Pitocin on the baby:
“The situation is analogous to holding an infant under the surface of the water, allowing the infant to come to the surface to gasp for air, but not to breathe.”
These effects may be partly due to the high blood levels of oxytocin that are reached when a woman labors with Pitocin. Theobald calculated that, at average levels used for induction or augmentation/acceleration, a woman’s oxytocin levels will be 130 to 570 times higher than she would naturally produce in labor. Direct measurements do not concur, but blood oxytocin levels are difficult to measure. Other researchers have suggested that continuous administration of this drug by iv infusion, which is very different to its natural pulsatile release, may also account for some of these problems.
I am like Sherie.........2 spontaneous labours (Olivia and Lexie) and one induced (Charlie).
The contractions were fast and furious and I felt out of control. (2 hours labour.......drip inserted, huge contraction, waters broke at 3pm, Charlie was born at 5pm)
In actual fact, my labour with Lexie was technically faster (waters broke at 9.15am, she was born at 9.55am.......a 40 minute labour!) but it felt so much more paced and natural & a whole lot less painful.
But, as the other girls have said, everyone is different................
I wasnt actully induced as such, but i had ARM at 730am when contractions werent to bad and i was 6cm..... but once they done that.. wow.. things moved up a notch pretty quickly... DD was born just under 4 hours later via vac extraction
My sister was induced, and she had a long labour still - not sure of the time frame thou, but, i just remember it was ages.
My friend at work was induced with both her kids, and she had short labours, like 6 - 7 hours.
Perhaps just depends on the individual and the baby.
My understanding is induction with the drip is what's painful - not so much the gels? I was augmented with the drip and found it ok, but that's probably different from being induced from nothing.. I'd already had 1 1/2 days of prelabour, waters were broken, and I was at 3cm already.
I agree with Sherie re the cascade of intervention. Definitely research natural induction methods, positioning etc etc, and many of the things you experienced last time could well be avoided.
All the best! It's great to see you asking so many questions. Best way to learn :)
Agree with Liz - it's the drip inductions that are worse.
The gels just get you started then your body takes over the job. With the drip, the artificial hormone in it literally forces your uterus to contract and it's being pumped into you constantly. Once they start the drip they rarely turn it down, or off so you're in for the long haul.
I had two drip inductions and I'll be blunt - it's like having your insides pulled out through your belly button with no anaesthetic. Utterly horrible.
If you want to avoid other interventions it's definitely something to avoid - it's very hard to get through a synto induction (esp. if it's really long) without pain relief and once you have an epidural, your open to all sorts of other interventions as others have already said.
i have been induced with both of my previous pregnancies - had the gel and the drip.
Sure it was painful, but i had nothing to compare it to. I used gas and pethidine and my labours were about 8- 9 hours. I'm hoping i don't have to be induced this time around - as i'm hoping that i can make it through without any pethidine this time.
i have had one drip induction, one spontanous labour and one gel induction and ummm they all hurt lol.
no seriously the drip induction was the worst i was having full on contractions pretty much one on top of the other from around 10am until 5pm when dd was born, she also had to be born with the help of forceps after 2hrs of ineffective pushing.
ds was spontaneous and completely drug free, and dd #2 was induced via the gel (she was born in 1hr) and i can honestly say that both #2 and #3 where on a par with each other as in the contractions.
i have heard that the fast births are hard as you don't have that gradual lead up, but in all honestly my dd's birth was fantastic and i don't believe it was all that painful.
everyone is just so so different and every birth is equally as different
I was induced with both my labours but only had the drip with DS with DD I had my waters broken and labour was allowed to start naturally. I found the induced labour with drip easier to handle then my more natural labpur with DD. With DS (waters broken and drip) and found labour a lot less intense, the contraction were even and occured every 2min, labour was 5hrs, while with DD contractions took 1 hour to become regular and then went to every 2min to every 30 sec I barely had time to draw breath between them and labout was 3 1/2 hrs - way too fast for me.
i found the pain a lot easier to handle with my induced labour then my more natural one as the contraction were more even and less intense.
Just wondering why you were induced with your DS and was he posterior at all cause often that can make for a longer labour.
I was induced because my waters broke and 3 days later and still not 1 contraction they thought they had better do something!!
I was induced at 7am and i lasted approx 4 hours until my contractions started and when they did holy crap it didnt stop...to this day i cant remember exactly what they did to induce me but i ended up with an epidural because i was getting no relief between comtractions...once that happend i fell asleep and and had to be woken to push because no matter what they did i couldnt feel any of the contractions and finally at 10.21pm DS was born!!
Im hoping this birth will be a bit more eventful well atleast start of better lol but again as the majority have said previously its all down to the individual
I had spontaneous labour with DS 1 and it was by far my worst, and resulted in a cascade of interventions, but was induced with No 2, had my waters broken, then drip started an our later, and it was done slowly, and my body could adjust. I found it intense, but definately better than the first.
I would also put that down to experience though and knowing a bit more what to expect.
It is definately different for every woman, and everyone's body will react differently to the induction, but they are not all bad!
Hi Saram,
I was induced with DS 10 days early because there was a slight leak of my waters, and the doctors said there was a greater chance for infection if I just left it. (Thinking back now, Im not sure why they didnt just monitor me or keep me in hospital for a few days, rather than induce me that early). No my DS was not posterior, he was 9 pounds and just had some trouble coming out, hence me having a vaccuum extraction.
Hope everything is going well with all of your pregnancy's!