# Baby not engaged at 40 weeks - labour less likely to happen naturally?



## MoonLove

Just seeking some positive/helpful experiences with this as i'm feeling slightly lousy at the moment. :nope:

My baby isn't at all engaged yet, and i can't help but think as she isn't by now, she won't be until labour starts. I know labour can start without baby being engaged, but is it any less likely - is my body any less ready for labour etc? :shrug:


I know that if my waters broke, i'd need to go straight into hospital, but as theres no real pressure from baby on them, i'm not expecting that to happen. I've been getting frequent braxton hicks and uncomfortable tightenings in the past few days and i don't know whether it'll amount to anything - or whether i'm just getting my hopes up.


I can't have a sweep tomorrow if baby is still not engaged, and its just left me feeling a little upset - feeling like its not going to happen naturally and i should just expect to be induced (which has problems of its own if baby is STILL not engaged in a weeks time!)

Oh, and i'm already spending lots of time on my birthing ball & walking etc!

Any experiences with this? I am trying to stay positive :hugs:Thank you! x


----------



## Sproutlet

Hi hun,

At 40 weeks my DD wasn't engaged and the 3 times I went to the midwife for a sweep (none of which started labour) she still wasn't engaged. 10 days overdue I went into natural labour with her. When I got to the hospital she was fully engaged. 

I like you spent a lot of time on my birthing ball and sat facing backwards on a dining chair leaning on the back (midwife told me it would open my pelvis). Nothing I did before labour got her to engage, although I spent most of my early labour on a birthing ball and I'm sure that helped.

You can go into natural labour without your baby being engaged I'm proof of it.

Good luck for your labour xx


----------



## Mum2b_Claire

Yup, Ruby's head was also still free at 40 weeks. She was posterior too, once she turned she engaged and I went into labour naturally at 41 weeks. Also, even when they're engaged they can pop back out so baby being engaged doesn't even mean a lot anyway.


----------



## Leahmasie

I'm sure it can happen. But I do think it's less likely you'll go into labor on your own. With a first birth the baby usually engages about 2 weeks before labor/birth. My mom says I didn't drop until 41 weeks, and she had me at 43 weeks. My son didn't drop until 41.5 weeks, and I decided to induce at 43 weeks instead of wait for him to come!

Lots of walking should help get baby down, and then the pressure on your cervix will keep things moving along.


----------



## Eternal

With my son (first) he wasnt engaged at 40 weeks, but delivered him at 40+6


----------



## sarah1980

Glad you asked this as my LO wasn't engaged at my 38 week appointment and I'm now starting to wonder what will happen if it's still the same at 40 weeks. The mw did say baby is at the "brim" of my pelvis at both 36 and 38 weeks so that is something I suppose :shrug:

Good luck gem_x I hope it all goes well for you.

Sarah xxx


----------



## absandjbs

My daughter did not engage until I was in labor. I was not induced and did have many BH the day before.


----------

