View Single Post
Old 10-09-2012, 02:28 PM   #18
canadianbakers's Avatar
canadianbakers
Registered Users
seller
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: MB, Canada
Posts: 9,221
My Mood:
Re: Going pat 41 weeks...really dangerous?

Quote:
Originally Posted by apurkeyp View Post
The rate of stillbirth increases after 38 weeks and significantly after 41.
Interesting. Where did you find these facts?
Going by my own experiences, I have had 4 healthy babies, born at 39+5 or past.
And one stillborn baby. At 23 weeks.


OP - With Levi, I was wanting a VBAC. I talked to my OB at my 40 week appointment about what the plan was. I told him I had no problems going to 42 weeks, if that's how long my body & baby needed to decide it was the right time. At 42 weeks, I would agree to have AROM and possibly pitocin (depending on how things went after AROM) for induction.
He said that was exactly what he had been planning/thinking, and that was just fine with him. He didn't want any extra testing or anything from 40-41 weeks, but after 41 weeks he did ask that I come in every 2-3 days for that week (so it would only have been a couple times anyways) for a NST and a quick u/s (if the NST didn't look good) just to check on baby. If everything looked fine, we would keep going.

Levi was born, after labor started on its own, at 41 weeks 4 days.
FWIW, he didn't look or seem overdue - he was nearly the same weight/size as DD and DS1, who were both born at 39+5. He actually had some trouble breathing for the first couple hours, and was in the NICU for O2 and observation - I can't imagine how much harder a time or more of a NICU stay he may have had, had we been induced at 40 weeks or earlier.


Basic nutshell - personally, I have no issues going to 42 weeks. Again, personally, I would not go past 42 weeks. But I can understand others who do, if mama and baby are still looking good.
__________________
~Elena~
Momma to R (11), Z (9), I (8), L (4), P (1) & Apr '15
remembering Elliana Lucy (2.7.12)
canadianbakers is offline   Reply With Quote