39+weeks & baby still not engaged:(

[mummyof3babas]

so this is my 3rd baby, both my other boys were engaged at this point but this lil mans still not hes head down but no engaged, does this mean il need a c-section are il go over due? x

 

[jinglebear]

in second and subsequent pregnancies its actually very normal for baby not to engage until labour begins. i wouldnt worry. even if baby was engaged it dosent mean that you will go into labour any sooner than if baby wasnt engaged. Im 37wks and baby was 3/5 engaged at 36wks but midwife also said to me it really dosent mean anything at all as this is my second baby. your muscles are usually slacker and pelvis more accomodating so baby can bounce in and out of pelvis like a wee bowling ball. x

 

[mspotter]

I wouldnt worry about it.
I went for my mw appointment at 39+5 with ds and was told he was nowhere near engaged, was never going to see a baby in at least the next week and i got booked for a sweep. Bubs decided to engage himself and break my waters the next night and was born a couple of hours later early hours of the morning spot on his dd!

 

[mummyof3babas]

ty ladies im booked for a sweep day after dd but thought it may not work due to him not been engaged:/ glad to know u were in same position as me and went into labour^ gives me hope xx

 

[pebbie1]

Awwww hun dont worry! A lot of babies don't engage until actual labour. Are you trying things to get it engaged? I had a check last week, cervix was posterior and baby high and not engaged at all. I started taking epo tablets (orally) and bounced on the ball. A week later cervix anterior, soft, 3cm dilated and baby engaged and fixed! The
Dr said that whatever I've been doing worked a treat

 

[mummyof3babas]

hey yea mw told me to have sex, nipple stimulation and keeping active which iv been doing but still no change:/ hope by tuesday when i go in for my sweep that somethings changedx

 

[alisha_t]

My DD didn't engage until I was actually in labor with her