# refusing induction?



## smileyfaces

Any positive stories of ladies who have refused an induction and gone past 42 weeks?

I'm only 28 weeks but am sure I will go overdue and be offered induction again for a third time. Both my previous inductions weren't necessarily bad or anything I just would like to think that this time I will be able to give my body a chance to do its own thing.

Still got ages to go until then but would like to hear any stories of ladies who refused an induction when they were approaching 42 weeks.

Thanks in advance :flower:


----------



## gemmagibs

i dont think its wise to refuse they dont like you to go past 42 week for me i would be to worried about the increased risk of still birth! XXxx


----------



## jtr2803

I am afraid I can't help in that I have done it, but I will be refusing if I get there myself. I am a member of the home birth UK group and there are quite a few ladies who have gone past 42 weeks, a couple have even gone past 43 weeks and been absolutely fine.

I think people are too trusting, your midwife might say oh the still birth risk goes up after 42 weeks but did you know that the actual relative risk increase is around 0.3%?! There is no significant increase until week 43, and even then it's still well under 1% (all stats available on evidence based birth) as per the Weiss study from 2014. Just to show, I've copied the paragraph:

The stillbirth rates in this study were:
37.0-37.6 days = 2.77 per 1,000
38.0-38.6 days = 1.09 per 1,000
39.0-39.6 days = 0.90 per 1,000
40.0-40.6 days = 0.72 per 1,000
41.0-41.6 days = 0.44 per 1,000
42.0-42.6 days = 0.70 per 1,000>42.6 days = 8.85 per 1,000 

There is no evidence that the Placenta ages excessively, as per the article by Harold Fox for the British Medical Journal. 

Induction on the other hand inherently increases the risk of C-Section as also evidence in the Evidence Based Birth article. 

Unfortunately, there aren't many of us who 'question' the status quo, as you can probably tell, I am one of them! I come across stories and situations time and time again of ladies being cajoled in to unnecessary procedures because no one has actually given them enough information to make an informed choice.


----------



## awnmyown

I also plan on refusing induction until I go over 42weeks. Ftm here as well, so I can't say I've done it, and I know already it'll come with pushback, but I'll fight it if I need to. The country's recommendations say daily monitoring after 41 weeks, so I think if that's showing clean, I wouldn't stress it. Plus, due dates are based on lmp, and I know for myself, I ovulated 5 days late the month we conceived. Which means the Aug 24 they gave me is actually 40w2d. Due dates are so not guaranteed accurate that I don't think we can trust an arbitrary number over our own bodies.


----------



## tulip2002

I was going to refuse any type of induction with my last baby as i was wanting a vbac my agreed plan with the hospital was allowed to be left alone till 42weeks. But agreed to sweeps at 40 and 41 weeks. If i was to go past 42 weeks i would go to the hospital for daily monitoring which i was happy with or course you do have to agree there comes a time when something would need to be done but luckily i went into labour at 41+2 so none of that happened and i continued to refuse any interventions and ler my labour progress on its own. I think personally i would have gone to 43 weeks then probably decided they induce me. Im pregnant again nearly 15 weeks and will be planning the same


----------



## LoveCakes

My friend refused until she went into spontaneous labour at 18 days over but they moved her dates by 2 weeks at her scan and she knew it was impossible so was confident that she was actually only a few days over. She went for monitoring every 2 days at the end


----------



## smileyfaces

Thank you all for the responses. I'm happy to hear that I'm not the only one looking at refusing. I'd like to think I'm getting a bit ahead of myself since I'm only 29 weeks but I just know I'm gonna be going overdue. I will probably give myself till just short of 43 weeks before I agree to it.


----------



## Amygdala

I refused with both my previous births. Baby one was 8 days "late" so although I had some fighting to do over not wanting to book an induction (which they ask you to do at 40 weeks here and book it for 40+12), I didn't actually make it to the point where they get worried. Baby two was 12 days "late". As I refused an induction date, they insisted I see a consultant at 40+11, who called me "ridiculous" for not not agreeing to induction and didn't offer any additional monitoring. I'm glad I stood my ground. I went into labour that night and ended up just barely escaping a section because baby had their very short cord around their neck, stalling labour. I was on the operating table when I went through transition and baby was born within 25 minutes of me being told I wasn't in active labour. There's no doubt in my mind that an even quicker, stronger labour as you get with induction would have ended in a section, or worse. 

Saying all that, this time around with baby three, I'm considering agreeing to induction. We're now 35 minutes from the hospital with no traffic and given my lightening labour last time, I see the advantage of knowing when it's going to happen. Anecdotally, inducing a third labour also seems a lot less likely to lead to other interventions than inducing a first labour, although I haven't look at any actual research on this. I've not really started thinking about this properly yet, just initial thoughts really.


----------



## Jessicahide

You have lots of people offering you their own experience and how it worked out for them and that is fantastic, but can i just add last year when i was in neo with my son, i got talking to a nurse who had been left after failed induction to go until 43 weeks and she nearly lost her baby, she expressed to me that they leave far too many women to go past 40 weeks and it increased risks so much and she was witness to it... I am induced at 37 weeks, always and wouldn't dream of refusing... Sorry to go aginst the flow, but they induce for good reason, its not a hobby for them.


----------



## smileyfaces

Going past 40 weeks isn't a risk? 40 weeks is just a guide. In a lot of European countries your due date is actually considered as being 41 weeks. Close to 50% of babies are born after their due date, its really not unusual at all.

I assume you are induced at 37 weeks for medical reasons? That is a different situation entirely. I wouldn't refuse an induction if it was medically necessary either. I will be refusing induction this time round though if it is purely for being "overdue".


----------



## Jessicahide

smileyfaces said:


> Going past 40 weeks isn't a risk? 40 weeks is just a guide. In a lot of European countries your due date is actually considered as being 41 weeks. Close to 50% of babies are born after their due date, its really not unusual at all.
> 
> I assume you are induced at 37 weeks for medical reasons? That is a different situation entirely. I wouldn't refuse an induction if it was medically necessary either. I will be refusing induction this time round though if it is purely for being "overdue".


I am induced for medical reasons, and no her words were in her opinion after what she has seen leaving women past 40 weeks is dangerous, sorry if that is not what you want to hear, but it was a neonatal nurses opinion. 

Stats might say different, but she is working hands on there and knows what she sees.


----------



## smileyfaces

If leaving women till 40 weeks was in any way dangerous then everyone would be pushed for an induction before their due date to ensure they were delivered for 40 weeks. Absolute rubbish, sorry.


----------



## Jessicahide

smileyfaces said:


> If leaving women till 40 weeks was in any way dangerous then everyone would be pushed for an induction before their due date to ensure they were delivered for 40 weeks. Absolute rubbish, sorry.

That's fine, i was quoting what someone who deals with this situation everyday told me.........


----------



## jtr2803

This is one of those things where someone who experienced a problem will obviously advise everyone to not do what they did.

A very big HOWEVER to me here though is that she had a failed induction?! You can't just interfere like that and then go hands off without some serious medical oversight on a continuous basis. There is not a single medical facility I know who will start an induction and then just point blank stop it because it doesn't progress. At that point they come out by c section and I'm very much wondering what they did to try and induce, there is every possibility that the intervention led to further issues - infection etc.

With any statistics, someone has to be the 1 in 1,000 that does go wrong, but that's still 999 that don't. I'm pretty happy with those odds so I'll be declining induction until close to 43 weeks.

Induction rate in the UK is 25% at the moment and 70% of those are for 'post date', wow, that's a crazy number of babies outstaying their welcome.... When there are that many not proceeding naturally, I can't help but wonder if that's just another variation of normal?


----------



## Jessicahide

jtr2803 said:


> This is one of those things where someone who experienced a problem will obviously advise everyone to not do what they did.
> 
> A very big HOWEVER to me here though is that she had a failed induction?! You can't just interfere like that and then go hands off without some serious medical oversight on a continuous basis. There is not a single medical facility I know who will start an induction and then just point blank stop it because it doesn't progress. At that point they come out by c section and I'm very much wondering what they did to try and induce, there is every possibility that the intervention led to further issues - infection etc.
> 
> With any statistics, someone has to be the 1 in 1,000 that does go wrong, but that's still 999 that don't. I'm pretty happy with those odds so I'll be declining induction until close to 43 weeks.
> 
> Induction rate in the UK is 25% at the moment and 70% of those are for 'post date', wow, that's a crazy number of babies outstaying their welcome.... When there are that many not proceeding naturally, I can't help but wonder if that's just another variation of normal?


If you are referring to the nurse i spoke with, she ended up with a c- section after he baby became distressed... The problem i have with the stats are they are showing still births, not when things go wrong. The nurse i spoke to deals on a daily basis with babies that she feels have been left too long who swallow meconium, become lodged and suffer lack of oxygen, suffer fractured skulls, broken arms ( from forceps) and have become distressed during birth. Loss of life before birth is not something she has to deal with working in neonatal.... In the past two years i have personal friends who have suffered losing their children, one after birth, he was born at 42 weeks and they didnt realise he was transverse, and another at 41 weeks who was stillborn, they said it was just "one of those things" 

The reason they induce after a baby "overstays" is because its dangerous for mum and baby, the reason they don't induce when everyone turns 40 weeks is because most women will go into labour naturally ( and much cheaper may i add) before 41 weeks, that really doesn't change what the lady spoke to me about and her very serious concerns for the "laxidasicle" attitude she thought hospitals had....


----------



## jtr2803

Jessicahide said:


> jtr2803 said:
> 
> 
> This is one of those things where someone who experienced a problem will obviously advise everyone to not do what they did.
> 
> A very big HOWEVER to me here though is that she had a failed induction?! You can't just interfere like that and then go hands off without some serious medical oversight on a continuous basis. There is not a single medical facility I know who will start an induction and then just point blank stop it because it doesn't progress. At that point they come out by c section and I'm very much wondering what they did to try and induce, there is every possibility that the intervention led to further issues - infection etc.
> 
> With any statistics, someone has to be the 1 in 1,000 that does go wrong, but that's still 999 that don't. I'm pretty happy with those odds so I'll be declining induction until close to 43 weeks.
> 
> Induction rate in the UK is 25% at the moment and 70% of those are for 'post date', wow, that's a crazy number of babies outstaying their welcome.... When there are that many not proceeding naturally, I can't help but wonder if that's just another variation of normal?
> 
> 
> If you are referring to the nurse i spoke with, she ended up with a c- section after he baby became distressed... The problem i have with the stats are they are showing still births, not when things go wrong. The nurse i spoke to deals on a daily basis with babies that she feels have been left too long who swallow meconium, become lodged and suffer lack of oxygen, suffer fractured skulls, broken arms ( from forceps) and have become distressed during birth. Loss of life before birth is not something she has to deal with working in neonatal.... In the past two years i have personal friends who have suffered losing their children, one after birth, he was born at 42 weeks and they didnt realise he was transverse, and another at 41 weeks who was stillborn, they said it was just "one of those things"
> 
> The reason they induce after a baby "overstays" is because its dangerous for mum and baby, the reason they don't induce when everyone turns 40 weeks is because most women will go into labour naturally ( and much cheaper may i add) before 41 weeks, that really doesn't change what the lady spoke to me about and her very serious concerns for the "laxidasicle" attitude she thought hospitals had....Click to expand...

I completely take your point on the fact that the statistics only look at still birth rates rather than other problems. In my experience, and from looking through other birth boards most hospitals are actually coercing ladies in to induction well before 42 weeks, so far, the people I know who are refusing induction have had to really fight their case. I am not sure where you live country/area wise? 

Anyone who goes over their individual areas induction guidelines should be offered a least bi-weekly CTGs and also a weekly scan to confirm amniotic pool depth. Whilst things can go wrong at any time, these should help to assess a number of possible issues. I am very sorry for your friends who have experienced losses, it doesn't really matter at what gestation they happen, it's obviously devastating.

Babies in bad positions can happen at any time, my brother became transverse during labour at just over 40 weeks and had to be an EMCS. I on the other hand was breech at 37 weeks and no one realised and I was a natural delivery. I'm just saying that these things happen inside pregnancies that clearly do fit the 'norm' as it were. I don't think we could ever insinuate that those problems stem just from post date labours.

There is also a lot of evidence that many of the procedures and practices in operation today are not truly helpful. Babies can often become distressed during induction, I am sure there is evidence especially surrounding epidurals and the lead on to instrumental deliveries but I don't have anything to hand to link to. I just think our bodies are amazing, most of the time they know what they need to do and we are losing in touch with that as time goes on and birth becomes more medicalised and dare I say, regulated.


----------



## Jessicahide

jtr2803 said:


> Jessicahide said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jtr2803 said:
> 
> 
> This is one of those things where someone who experienced a problem will obviously advise everyone to not do what they did.
> 
> A very big HOWEVER to me here though is that she had a failed induction?! You can't just interfere like that and then go hands off without some serious medical oversight on a continuous basis. There is not a single medical facility I know who will start an induction and then just point blank stop it because it doesn't progress. At that point they come out by c section and I'm very much wondering what they did to try and induce, there is every possibility that the intervention led to further issues - infection etc.
> 
> With any statistics, someone has to be the 1 in 1,000 that does go wrong, but that's still 999 that don't. I'm pretty happy with those odds so I'll be declining induction until close to 43 weeks.
> 
> Induction rate in the UK is 25% at the moment and 70% of those are for 'post date', wow, that's a crazy number of babies outstaying their welcome.... When there are that many not proceeding naturally, I can't help but wonder if that's just another variation of normal?
> 
> 
> If you are referring to the nurse i spoke with, she ended up with a c- section after he baby became distressed... The problem i have with the stats are they are showing still births, not when things go wrong. The nurse i spoke to deals on a daily basis with babies that she feels have been left too long who swallow meconium, become lodged and suffer lack of oxygen, suffer fractured skulls, broken arms ( from forceps) and have become distressed during birth. Loss of life before birth is not something she has to deal with working in neonatal.... In the past two years i have personal friends who have suffered losing their children, one after birth, he was born at 42 weeks and they didnt realise he was transverse, and another at 41 weeks who was stillborn, they said it was just "one of those things"
> 
> The reason they induce after a baby "overstays" is because its dangerous for mum and baby, the reason they don't induce when everyone turns 40 weeks is because most women will go into labour naturally ( and much cheaper may i add) before 41 weeks, that really doesn't change what the lady spoke to me about and her very serious concerns for the "laxidasicle" attitude she thought hospitals had....Click to expand...
> 
> I completely take your point on the fact that the statistics only look at still birth rates rather than other problems. In my experience, and from looking through other birth boards most hospitals are actually coercing ladies in to induction well before 42 weeks, so far, the people I know who are refusing induction have had to really fight their case. I am not sure where you live country/area wise?
> 
> Anyone who goes over their individual areas induction guidelines should be offered a least bi-weekly CTGs and also a weekly scan to confirm amniotic pool depth. Whilst things can go wrong at any time, these should help to assess a number of possible issues. I am very sorry for your friends who have experienced losses, it doesn't really matter at what gestation they happen, it's obviously devastating.
> 
> Babies in bad positions can happen at any time, my brother became transverse during labour at just over 40 weeks and had to be an EMCS. I on the other hand was breech at 37 weeks and no one realised and I was a natural delivery. I'm just saying that these things happen inside pregnancies that clearly do fit the 'norm' as it were. I don't think we could ever insinuate that those problems stem just from post date labours.
> 
> There is also a lot of evidence that many of the procedures and practices in operation today are not truly helpful. Babies can often become distressed during induction, I am sure there is evidence especially surrounding epidurals and the lead on to instrumental deliveries but I don't have anything to hand to link to. I just think our bodies are amazing, most of the time they know what they need to do and we are losing in touch with that as time goes on and birth becomes more medicalised and dare I say, regulated.Click to expand...


I 100% agree that we intervene too much and it causes problems, there is a massive increased risk when you have an epidural, we are far too medicalised when it comes to birth, none of those things override the need for induction. I live in bedford, i have had given birth in leeds, london and here... The maternity wards i have frequented have turned women away who are in labour, and refused to induce women who are booked in ( been this person myself!) so i am not sure what hospitals you are talking about... Induction is expensive and usually results in more drugs and intervention like you said... But they are a very very necessary thing... I have been induced 4 times now ( 5th will be this year) I have had very hair raising experiences and amazingly positive ones, but i can tell you after delivering a stillborn baby at 37 weeks i wouldn't be so blase about the risks to my baby by going overdue!


----------



## jtr2803

I don't think it's fair to say 'blasé about the risks', I choose to do a lot of research on these subjects and I consider it all when I make my choices. I think that's all we can do and it's ultimately personal choice, I just think anyone who needs to make that choice needs to be presented with ALL available evidence both for and against induction before they decide. Induction is always presented as part of pregnancy these days and most people don't even realise that they can decline or at least attempt to postpone.

My baby centre birth board is full of ladies being told they need to be induced, for a variety of reasons, but are then being left on wards for up to 5 days because they don't have the resources to carry out the process. That makes things worse in my eyes, these ladies are knackered and emotionally and mentally drained before they even have a contraction. If these post date inductions were so medically necessary should they be left that long? Not trying to debate that by the way, it's a musing. So yes, I agree that this is an issue but my point was that ladies are still being TOLD they need to be induced, my previous post was meaning that anyone who doesn't want to be induced is having to really fight the system.

I think we will agree to disagree on this subject :thumbup: we both have the right to do what we feel is best for us and that's something I am grateful for.

I would also like to say how sorry I am for your loss. :hugs:


----------



## maryanne1987

It really does depend on what study you look at, as different studies quote different figures. Honestly I personally wouldnt refuse, as I wouldnt want to take any chances no matter how small. My son was so ill after being allowed to go the full two weeks over as my placenta wasn't working as it should anymore and he's been left disabled and will likely need care his whole life. But you must do what's best for you and your baby in your situation, as long as your happy that's all that matters. I did how ever refuse a 37 week induction last pregnancy as the only reason it was being performed was they were concerned she was large for dates but I have no faith in growth scans and wanted to wait till 38 weeks. Luckily I went into labour naturally the night before I was due to be induced. 

Whoever said they don't start induction and then if it fails it ends in a section, well that's not entirely true. In our hospital procedure is pesery induction. If after three pesseries active labour isn't established you are then sent home for 48 hours only to have to return them for another attempt. If that fails then they will try other options such as breaking waters or a hormone drip all before resorting to a section. I know as I experienced it with my son. Took me to exactly 14 days overdue. Can't say it was a pleasant experience. I have to be induced this time and I'm not looking forward to it but due to multiple medical conditions its what's safest for baby. Although I'm nervous I know the end result will be totally worth it.


----------



## jtr2803

maryanne1987 said:


> It really does depend on what study you look at, as different studies quite different figures. Honestly I personally wouldnt refuse, as I wouldnt want to take any chances no matter how small. My son was so ill after being allowed to go the full two weeks over as my placenta wasn't working as it should anymore and he's been left disabled and will likely need care his whole life. But you must do what's best for you and your baby in your situation, as long as your happy that's all that matters. I did how ever refuse a 37 week induction last pregnancy as the only reason it was being performed was they were concerned she was large for dates but I have no faith in growth scans and wanted to wait till 38 weeks. Luckily I went into labour naturally the night before I was due to be induced.
> 
> Whoever said they don't start induction and then if it fails it ends in a section, well that's not entirely true. In our hospital procedure is pesery induction. If after three pesseries active labour isn't established you are them sent home for 48 hours only to have to return them for another attempt. If that fails then they will try other options such as breaking waters or a hormone drip all before resorting to a section. I know as I experienced it with my son. Took me to exactly 14 days overdue. Can't say it was a pleasant experience. I have to be induced this time and I'm not looking forward to it but due to multiple medical conditions its what's safest for baby. Although I'm nervous I know the end result will be totally worth it.

Ive just gone back to evidence based birth and the three most recent modern medicine studies that were completed suggest a rate of 0.7 to 1.17 up to 42 weeks, so quite a minimal difference in actually numerical terms.

It was me who said about failed induction, probably yet another procedure that seems to vary wildly between areas then as here, induction is started at 41+10 and the process, once started, is followed right through. You can go home after the first process here to labour but if it doesn't work then it's active management until delivery.


----------



## MrS. MaBrEy

I'll be refusing any intervention what-so-ever this time. I was bullied into induction last time and had unsafe drugs used leading to ECS. If i go past 42 weeks I'll gladly have an Unassisted Home Birth. I'm not interested in unnecessary medical interventions and I have no fear of issues. I trust my body.


----------



## kittylady

In evidence terms one nurse giving a couple of case studies does not override clinical studies looking at hundreds or thousands of births. For a start eyewitness accounts are always less accurate and our memories can be biased based on past experience. The nurse for example with her own baby now remembers problem cases but doesn't mention the number of normal births past this point. Humans, like other mammals are designed to give birth several times during their lifetime and better sanitation has made birth much safer. They actually consider home birth safer in the uk for low risk women with subsequent pregnancies as there is a much lower risk of complications and required assistance or cs.


----------



## tommyg

I've been told they don't want me to go beyond my due date, due to IVF pregnancy & my age.

Can anybody point me in the direction of what exactly the increased risk is? 

My last birth was a fairly straight forward water birth. Laboured for 29 hours at home either in the bath or wandering round the house and 3 hours in hospital. Gas n Air waters pushed for about 35 mins. The thought of being stuck in a hospital bed, no bath, no where to wander, no telly to watch, truthfully scares me shitless.


----------



## babyv13

I refused induction with my DD and they were totally fine with it, they arranged for me to have daily monitoring from (I think) +12 but I didn't make it that far, she was born at +8 :)


----------



## Amygdala

Where in Scotland are you? Most hospitals now have birthing pools I think or at least bath tubs to labour in. That's not to say you shouldn't look into whether or not to agree to induction and yeah, you'd definitely be more comfortable at home. But just wanted to say it's not really the old "chained to the bed" scenario anymore, even if you do end up in hospital for your whole labour.


----------



## tommyg

I will be going to the Southern General / QEU Glasgow. The maternity ward has 2 birth pools but I'd doubt that you'd be able to use them if you are induced. 

Last time round I laboured at home, alone for 12 hours overnight, watched TV until 4am, went for a bath CD blaring. Nobody else in the house so nobody else to disturb. DH came home about 9am I paced the floor with every contraction until I went back in the bath that evening. Before going to hospital and getting into "established" labour 4cm. 

Unlikely they would move somebody to the labour suites until in establish labour - so I'm worried about getting into established labour - without being a complete pain in the arse to other ladies - and additional pain to myself. 

I am aware that starting with "just a pessary" can and often does lead to more interferenace.


----------



## Amygdala

Yeah, I agree with you about the added discomfort of being in the hospital and also the increased risk of further intervention. My friend who was induced at the southern general had access to a bathtub to labour in though, maybe that makes you feel a little better about it all? Not that I'm saying you should consent. I know very little about the risk associated with "post term" IVF pregnancies or the role your age plays. I'm in a different health board btw and was told that induction by itself wouldn't stop me from having a water birth. Definitely worth talking through with your consultant I think. They should be able to both give you actual numbers and answer your questions regarding procedure. If you're around term, there are also gentle ways you can encourage labour at home, like hip circles and belly lifts that help baby push on your cervix, which can trigger labour. I'm convinced that's what finally started regular contractions with my last, although I also had a sweep the day before so can't be sure.


----------



## smileyfaces

At my hospital they have always said no to water birth if you are being induced. However, they have recently bought. Machine that allows them to monitor your baby in the water without you needing to get out and be strapped to the monitor, so they now allow water birth as long as this machine isn't in use by anyone else.


----------



## tommyg

That is at least a comfort knowing I will have a bath to labour in. Hopefully they have plenty of them. Last time I laboured for about 5.30 hours in it. Getting out only to swap my CDs over. Topping up with hot water as required. Lol.


----------



## smileyfaces

I was in the bath for a while with baby #1 in the hospital. They are usually very accommodating for it!


----------



## jtr2803

In my area now they are doing outpatient induction! You go in for monitoring, if everything is fine they do the gel and then let you go home to see if things start. 

Obviously more formal methods would mean having to stay in but at least you can be at home to start.

I'm 40+9 today, midwife tomorrow where she'll offer a sweep but I'll be declining. I've been losing plug over the past few days so hoping this is a sign. If I go past Saturday I'll opt for monitoring and see how that goes.


----------



## tommyg

Outpatient induction sounds like a great compromise. Which hospital is that?


----------



## jtr2803

I'm down south, under Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells nhs trust. I've read of it happening at other hospitals but it does seem rare now.

They must obviously see some benefit in doing it, everything I've read indicates that a relaxed mum is likely to progress better. It's also a crazy busy hospital so I'm sure it helps them with bed management too!


----------



## Tasha

The thing is a nurse is going to see all the bad outcomes and not all the good ones as they would have gone straight home not to neonatal. 

Any way, you know my history and if I was low risk then absolutely I'd hang on. I had an induction with Kaysie at 39 weeks because of Honey being stillborn at 36+6. We ended up with a section because the induction made her distressed. It was one hour and I went from 0cm to 8cm in that time, it was too much for her and out her in danger. That intervention affected my life in so many ways. 

I would want regular monitoring and then I'd be happy to listen to my body in that the placenta is watched and also if baby is happy.


----------



## tommyg

Tasha, I'm guessing that I am forgetting that their could be a risk to baby going over my date. Sorry about what happened to Honey, hugs xx. I was in the "won't happen to me camp". 

I have yet to hear of anybody having a good induction story. I've heard long painful labours involving epidural's, forceps, emergency sections, and the opposite end of the scale baby almost being delivered in a bathroom, midwives opened the door and go mum onto a bed with the head already out - not even a curtain for privacy.

But I guess any delivery is a success as long as you both go home and make full recovery at the end of it.


----------



## Tasha

For me it was too long without water, which is why it isimportant to have regular scans post 41/42 weeks to check the waters and placenta. 

My point actually was that despite my experiences that dates wouldn't push me to induction just based on that alone. Clinical factors are more important to me.

I had an awful induction with my first, second spontaneous, Honey was an induction (was great but sad and very quick ninety minutes first contraction to holding her), Kaysie I already wrote about, Riley Rae was spontaneous and then Orion was an induction at 36+3 and that was fantastic but only because I'm headstrong, they were trying to get me to have pain killers, an epidural etc purely because I was on the drip for induction and they told me no one copes with out pain killers, I refused them even when I had the most amount I could have, refused to stay on the bed etc, so if I listened to them I'm sure more intervention would have happened. 

Obviously you both being healthy and going home at then end of it is the most important outcome, however that doesn't mean that other stuff isn't important too. I look back at certain experiences and they will beautiful, I don't regret a second and every woman should have that if at all possible. They wouldn't feel like it is a means to an end or they have no say. Research, talk to professionals, talk to like minded people, talk to the head of midwifery and anyone who is pro-normal birth and then make your decision knowing you're doing what you feel is right. Statistics are important but in these cases the individual circumstances and care should be the biggest factor.


----------



## tommyg

Thanks Tasha I really appreciate your experiences. 
Did you cope ok being on drip without epidural?

I'm half convinced epidural is best avoided if possible. The thought of a needle in my spinal cord freaks me out. I was told the other day of somebody who was perched on the bed for an hour while they faffed trying to get epidural in. 
Then take into account it meaning you can't walk or stand. It can't be natural to birth lying down.

In very early labour the last time with bearable when upright contractions I decided to try and get some sleep / rest. I just about went into orbit with the next contraction. Tried again and gave up. Concluded lying down wasn't meant to happen.

I think you are right research so I know the risks. Ensure that there is a real reason for being induced (not just national stats).


----------



## smileyfaces

I had a positive induction with my first. Second induction was a veryblong process but once established labour started it was actually another very positive experience. I never had an epidural with either of them!

The whole point of the thread wasn't to bash inductions or anything, as I said, I've had two and they were okay, I would just rather avoid it and let my body do its thing as long as baby is happy and placenta is functioning okay!


----------



## Tasha

I really did cope fine. I had only had the drip twice before, with Kaysie and with Morgan. Morgan they instantly put an epi in as they put up the drip. If I'd had known then what I do now I wouldn't have allowed that. Orion they did keep saying right from the beginning about an epi. This time it never happened and I was much more assertive. I was on beanbags, squatting, all sorts during mine. So if you need to go down that route then just know what you want.

I think that was really clear smiley, I just wanted to reassure those that have only read about bad inductions incase it is necessary for them. I hope you don't think I was saying to just do it, I 100% agree with you, baby, placenta and clinical signs are more important than gestational age.


----------



## tommyg

Smiley I didn't mean to knock induction we are just opposite sides of the same coin.

Simply I'm terrified of the idea of being induced. Days before going into labour the last time I was advised to be induced - I pushed the date back by a few days and was dreading it. Wrote my birth plan in the middle of the night & broke the pen I was so stressed at the idea.
A back massage chilled me out enough to start labour. 

This time i have been told of induction at 40 weeks (DS was born at 40&6). Frankly I have 4 months to worry about it. 

Please give me your positive stories.


----------



## smileyfaces

I don't get why they insist on offering an epi straight away. I really don't. Luckily my hospital are quite reluctant to give them anyway so was never offered. I did ask at one point during the labour with Oscar but by then it was too late. 

I obviously have no basis for comparison as I have only ever been induced so I'm not sure what the pain of an induction is like versus the pain of a natural onset labour.

TommyG why do they want to induce you at 40 weeks? Medical reasons? If not, you are well within your rights to say no thank you.


----------



## lau86

I've had two inductions, one natural. The pain is no different imo. What was different for me was I went into hospital in established labour for my natural so was offered gas and air straight away. My inductions I was left on the ward and only had paracetamol despite insisting I needed something else (they thought I wasn't in labour as it was 'too quick'). I would never refuse induction, my Third baby it wasn't a concrete reason at all and in hindsight wasn't necessary but I would do It again. Good luck


----------



## Tasha

I've no clue smiley. They say things like you will need it and similar. Their favourite one when I was having Orion was that they've never seen anyone have an induction without any pain killers. It gets inside women's head and it makes them believe that they can't do it, they might not mean that it happen but it's why language to pregnant women is so important.

For me induction with pessary or gel was the same as spontaneous labour but with a drip was far more intense.


----------



## lau86

Yes mine were pessaries I've never had the drip


----------



## smileyfaces

I've had one with a pessary and one with a drip. I didn't find them.any different, both equally as painful :shrug:


----------



## jtr2803

Declined sweep today, will have one either Thursday or Friday I expect. Midwife is also going to confirm plan for additional monitoring if no arrival by Saturday. 

Still hoping things will start, still a bit niggly with back and plug gone.


----------



## tommyg

The reasons given for not wanting me to go over 40 weeks are my age 41 & IVF baby. 
The reason for IVF isn't age related my AMH (ovarian reserve) was off the scale but that is what happens when you don't ovulate on a monthy basis.


----------



## tommyg

I did have a sweep the last time and probably will again. My logic with a sweep is if your aren't ready to go into labour it won't work.


----------



## smileyfaces

tommyg said:


> I did have a sweep the last time and probably will again. My logic with a sweep is if your aren't ready to go into labour it won't work.

Agree!


----------



## Walbra

I don't think it is wise to refuse if it has gone beyond 42 weeks.


----------



## mrsclt

tommyg said:


> Tasha, I'm guessing that I am forgetting that their could be a risk to baby going over my date. Sorry about what happened to Honey, hugs xx. I was in the "won't happen to me camp".
> 
> I have yet to hear of anybody having a good induction story. I've heard long painful labours involving epidural's, forceps, emergency sections, and the opposite end of the scale baby almost being delivered in a bathroom, midwives opened the door and go mum onto a bed with the head already out - not even a curtain for privacy.
> 
> But I guess any delivery is a success as long as you both go home and make full recovery at the end of it.

Here's your positive induction story &#128522;
I was induced on my due date due to gestational hypertension. I had a sweep done early afternoon as i was already 2cm dialated and fully effaced. Then around 7:30pm they broke my waters. Around 8pm, started the oxytocin. Hubby and I were watching Guardians of the Galaxy, got about halfway through the movie when i turned it off because my contractions were getting stronger. I laboured without pain relief until about 10pm, which is when I started pushing. Took an hour to push him out, but thats normal for a first birth from what i hear. I only had a very minor grade 1 tear, didn't require any stitches. My boy was very healthy, and we went home 12 hours later once my blood pressure had returned to normal and the hypertension had resolved.

Not all inductions go wrong. Personally, though I'd love to go into labour on my own this time, I won't refuse it if its deemed necessary. I also wont refuse it if they offer due to going over my due date. I know a lady who was over her due date, and the baby died the day before her induction. Also, my mother was induced with all four of us, as she just didn't go into labour on her own. Not sure with my brothers, but i was born with very little water left in the sack, none of that white creamy stuff was left on my skin and i was very pink and wrinkled - mum said I looked over cooked lol. All things which can happen at any time i know, but i personally wouldn't risk it, as i really dont think induction is all bad.
But each to their own. Best of luck with all your births &#128522;


----------



## Wannabe Mommy

I was induced due to GD and also had a great experience. Pessary inserted and I hung around the hospital for 24 hrs on the ward, snoozing, wandering around, taking walks around the grounds, eating and so on. Next day they checked and were able to break my waters. 4 and a half hrs later I asked for gas n air as the contractions were getting really strong and about 10 mins later I told the midwife I needed to push, I was still upright and pacing round the bed at this point, no wires or forced bed bound or anything.

She checked and I was fully dilated so I was moved to the delivery room, 3 pushes later I had my beautiful 8lb 11oz little angel in my arms.

I found the pain to actually be less than I expected, I thought I'd be screaming the place down in agony but other than the last 10-15 mins when I had a little gas n air I had no pain relief and was able to just walk through the contractions.


----------

