2 cm dilated, 60% effaced- but baby isn't engaged at all?

[bookworm0901]

I've heard that sometimes second babies don't engage until labor starts- but this is my first. Someone told me that first babies usually start to engage at 36 weeks and I am 37+5. I am already a bit dilated (2 cm) and effaced (60%) but the baby isn't engaged whatsoever.

So which would be a bigger sign that my body is gearing up for labor? Engaging OR dilating/effacing? I've heard that you can dilate for weeks before labor, so I would assume that engaging is a better sign. Boo!

Or- third option- do neither really mean anything and baby could come whenever? Any of you have personal experience with engaging and going into labor early versus not engaging and going over due?

Thanks!

 

[kmbabycrazy]

Truth be told you could be walking round with both and engaged baby and a cervix dilated at 3cm for weeks before you give birth. Both mean your body is preparing but neither mean you'll be going into labour soon if they happen. If that makes sense xx

 

[bookworm0901]

Okay that makes sense! It's kinda what I thought until someone told me that first babies usually engage at 36 weeks. It made me think my little man might be a little behind and therefore, overdue. I have no plans to evict quite yet though, just wondering what my body is doing naturally!

The dilating and effacing all seems random to me, it doesn't seem to matter how dilated/effaced you are to indicate labor. I just wasn't sure if engaging was the same!

 

[kmbabycrazy]

Yeah it is. My son was fully engaged at 36 weeks and I started losing my plug at 35 weeks...he still came 5 days overdue x

 

[tu123]

Your body is preparing but you wont be in labour until you stat contracting. And if baby isnt engaged by then those contra tions will helpfully get LO there