Cloth Diapers & Parenting Community - DiaperSwappers.com

Cloth Diapers & Parenting Community - DiaperSwappers.com (http://www.diaperswappers.com/forum/index.php)
-   Pregnancy (http://www.diaperswappers.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=13)
-   -   Which would be considered better? (long) (http://www.diaperswappers.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1473631)

kaylabelle05 12-18-2012 11:57 PM

Which would be considered better? (long)
 
So I have kidney issues. If it is not a kidney stone attack, it is chronic kidney pain.

Because of my pain, I am now on a Fentanyl patch. I was on this with DD and there were issues stemming from it. But the main thing on my mind then and my mind now is; is it better to keep the baby in past "full term" or to kick baby out so my pain will go away?

My previous OB wanted to get DD out at 36 and 37 weeks but Amnio's said her lungs were not ready. He had a theory that once I delivered, my pain would go away. He was 100% correct. I think it will be the same way in this case. I am VERY against any sort of medical intervention unless warranted. But I think being the person who would experience this, I am too close to make a rational decision.

No matter what, I want to wait until Feb 1st before ANYTHING happens. That puts me at exactly 38 weeks. Part of it is I don't want a January b-day for this baby because of how many Jan b-day's there are in just the last week of Jan (25, 27, 29, 30). But I also know that 38 weeks is perfect in terms of being ok for delivery. DS was born at 37 and DD at 38 (no inducement needed). But I am concerned that this little stinker (see other thread about violent kickers) will want to make me wait as long as possible just to torture me.

I did ask my OB about a 38 week induction as he said ok at 39 weeks (because of the new policy). He said ask my high-risk OB (appt is on 12/30). But should I really wait?

The scenarios:
If Squishy stays in, the more narcotics "he" will get. Also the more narcotics I get, the harder it is on me (and subsequently baby) the weaning process will be. Since I did do it with DD, I know what to do but it wasn't easy. DD did have to be watched for signs on withdrawal but half the signs they saw were because of her genetic condition. I do not believe Squishy has it ("his" kicks are too strong to be low muscle toned.) (We will be starting the weaning process starting at 36 weeks so the transition won't be so bad for either of us)

If Squishy is evicted "early" because of induction, I know there is a chance for a c-section. But also, it means no more narcotics for either of us (except to slowly wean). It also means I can have an actual date to start treatment to get rid of my leftover stones.

If Squishy comes on "his" own then I don't have to worry about anything. Though DH would appreciate it if I deliver AFTER the last week of January. He has an advancement exam that week.

I know that I should wait until labor starts naturally. But on the other hand, I want Squishy to stay in as long as needed before kicking "him" out because I know what is in store for me. I know the bigger "he" gets, the higher chance it is for him to kick my kidney and send me to the hospital. He barely touched it a few weeks ago and it sent me into tears.

GAH!:banghead::banghead::banghead:

canadianbakers 12-19-2012 07:06 AM

Re: Which would be considered better? (long)
 
That's a tough situation. Under normal circumstances, I don't agree with inducing any time before 39+ weeks. But you've definitely got not-normal circumstances.

I would still want to make it until term - 37 weeks. At that point I would likely ask for amnio to be done to check for baby's lung maturation. If his lungs were ready, I would go ahead with induction. If his lungs were not ready, I would wait it out.
That goes for inducing at any point before 39 weeks, for me.

kaylabelle05 12-19-2012 04:12 PM

Re: Which would be considered better? (long)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by canadianbakers (Post 16060151)
That's a tough situation. Under normal circumstances, I don't agree with inducing any time before 39+ weeks. But you've definitely got not-normal circumstances.

I would still want to make it until term - 37 weeks. At that point I would likely ask for amnio to be done to check for baby's lung maturation. If his lungs were ready, I would go ahead with induction. If his lungs were not ready, I would wait it out.
That goes for inducing at any point before 39 weeks, for me.

38 weeks is the earliest I would be ok with inducing. Like I said, I don't want a January baby. Besides my silly reasons, I also know it is not good for baby to be born early unless labor starts naturally. I don't want a "I'm in too much pain so it puts me into labor" induction either.

cheezpoofs 12-19-2012 06:52 PM

Re: Which would be considered better? (long)
 
Thirty-eight weeks might would be the perfect time for baby to born, if it was just the right time for that particular baby and if you could be absolutely certain that thirty-eight weeks was exactly as far along you were. Since you can't predict these things from the outside, I don't think this aspect can be determined accurately.

That said, I am against elective inductions for most non-medical reasons; but then, I know nothing of your pain or what the risks are to carrying until baby comes on "his" own whenever versus earlier forced eviction. I would weigh the risks of both options including drug dependence, possibility of prematurity, possibility of Cesarean, etc. and figure out which was best for you and your baby and go with whichever option that is.

canadianbakers 12-20-2012 11:59 AM

Re: Which would be considered better? (long)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by kaylabelle05 (Post 16062005)
38 weeks is the earliest I would be ok with inducing. Like I said, I don't want a January baby.

Still my post stands, just 38 instead of 37 :) I'd still want an amnio done first to check baby's lung maturity, and go from there.

mommycass 12-20-2012 04:50 PM

Re: Which would be considered better? (long)
 
Normally I would support waiting but under your circumstances if baby's lungs are mature I'd go for an induction at 38 wks. If you do decide to get induced I would maybe try to start the weaning of narcotics before 36 wks so its not as hard on either of you after delivery. Sorry your in so much pain:hugs:

MommaLEB 12-20-2012 06:35 PM

Re: Which would be considered better? (long)
 
I'll add my vote for trying to hold out for 38 weeks then get testing. Thirty eight weeks is a week into term and pretty safe for most babies.

I'm sorry you're dealing with this. I also have to take medication during pregnancy and the guilt and second guessing sucks so much sometimes.

TwinKristi 12-20-2012 11:00 PM

I'd say 38wks too. I've had babies in the 37-39wk range for medical reasons and my 39 has done best long term wealth wise. My 37wk guy even though he was ok at birth has had allergy issues, chronic ear infections, asthma, etc.
If your dr will do 38wks I think it's good compromise in your situation.

kaylabelle05 12-21-2012 05:39 PM

Re: Which would be considered better? (long)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by mommycass (Post 16065732)
Normally I would support waiting but under your circumstances if baby's lungs are mature I'd go for an induction at 38 wks. If you do decide to get induced I would maybe try to start the weaning of narcotics before 36 wks so its not as hard on either of you after delivery. Sorry your in so much pain:hugs:

I would LOVE to get off the narcotics. They are really what is making me wish Squishy would come early. The sooner "he" is born, the sooner I can get off of them. But without them, I will start labor. My patch ran out early today and I was having regular contractions, because of my pain, that were not too strong or long. Within a few house of putting on the new patch, the contractions went away.

Our plan (OB & I) is to start weaning at 36 weeks (if I can). I will go on a lower dose patch from 36-37 weeks and then even lower from 37-38 weeks. Then depending on when Squishy comes, either I will start on a long acting narcotic just before delivery (whether natural or induction) or as soon as "he" is born. With DD, they took the patch off within 30 mins of delivery and gave me MS Contin. I slowly tapered off for both DD and I the following month.

kaylabelle05 12-21-2012 05:47 PM

Re: Which would be considered better? (long)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by MommaLEB (Post 16066052)
I'll add my vote for trying to hold out for 38 weeks then get testing. Thirty eight weeks is a week into term and pretty safe for most babies.

I'm sorry you're dealing with this. I also have to take medication during pregnancy and the guilt and second guessing sucks so much sometimes.

I really would not even think before 38 weeks. I really really really do NOT want a January baby. I know it is a stupid reason, but I don't want Squishy to share a b-day with my mom(25th), my dad(27th), my sister(29th), or my MIL(30th). Also Feb 1st is 38 weeks exactly. And I do know my dates within 1 day. I had a blood test on the 5/26 due to having a kidney infection. I started testing within 5 days and the day AF was due, I got a BFP. I had been testing because of symptoms and got faint +'s before then. Plus when I went in for my 1st appt, my old OB did an U/S to see if it was viable (too many MC's) and had my conception date of 5/26 instead of 5/25 like I had.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:18 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vB.Sponsors