Steroid shot for baby's lungs at 38 weeks?! Opinion needed

[jenmcn1]

So I am having my csection on May 30th, I will be 38-39 weeks at that point. I am seeing both a midwife and doctor. Yesterday my doctor told me that I will need the steroid shots the week before my csection, to help mature baby's lungs. I completely disagree with him, as baby will be considered full term at that point. I feel like this is unnecessary. I will be discussing this with my midwife. My first baby. Was born at 37 weeks and he was completely fine, no issues with his breathing. If I was 35 weeks pregnant and having a csection that would be totally different and I would take the shots. Doctor says It's to minimize the time re baby spends I. The NICU. I would understand his concern if I wasn't delivering at full term

 

[Celesse]

I don't think I'd base my decision on whether it was or wasn't necessary. I'd be looking at the risks and wanting to know the stats.

What are the risks of having the steroid injection? Are they worse than the risks of already explained to you by the doctor, a small chance baby isn't mature enough and has breathing issues? How small is that risk? How many babies go to NICU when born by planned c-section at 38 weeks, with/without the steroid injection? What research and evidence is she basing the decision for giving the steroid on?

Yes, term is between 37 and 42 weeks, but if that baby was meant to be born closer to 42 weeks then that's 4 weeks of growth and development they are missing out on. I'd want to know all the facts before accepting or declining the treatment.

 

[jenmcn1]

I don't think I'd base my decision on whether it was or wasn't necessary. I'd be looking at the risks and wanting to know the stats.

What are the risks of having the steroid injection? Are they worse than the risks of already explained to you by the doctor, a small chance baby isn't mature enough and has breathing issues? How small is that risk? How many babies go to NICU when born by planned c-section at 38 weeks, with/without the steroid injection? What research and evidence is she basing the decision for giving the steroid on?

Yes, term is between 37 and 42 weeks, but if that baby was meant to be born closer to 42 weeks then that's 4 weeks of growth and development they are missing out on. I'd want to know all the facts before accepting or declining the treatment.

Thank you! Yes I agree with you I want to know all facts and what the risks are with the steroids to the baby. For my situation I'm not allowed a regular birth, my last csection was a vertical incision. I'm at a very high risk of uterine rupture. People with these type of csection are not legally allowed a vaginal birth. My midwife won't allow it either. So with all the narcotic I will be on with the surgery, I just think steroid shots on top orbit (if it's not necessary) is not what I want. My family and I are naturally minded with our eating and healthcare. We no longer vaccinate our children either. So I wonder what preservatives are in the steroid shots. Of course I want the best for my baby.... But I think doctors are too quick to jump at precautions. So confused right now

 

[emalou90]

Weighing up the possibilities is what's probably the best option. Like it seems you're thinking that way.

Though, just because your baby at 35 weeks was fine, it may not mean this one certainly will be (all babies are different as you know)
Consider all of the options, maybe knowing more about how your baby is developing further down the line will help you decide nearer the time

Whatever you choose, knowing both sides always helps!

 

[jenmcn1]

Weighing up the possibilities is what's probably the best option. Like it seems you're thinking that way.

Though, just because your baby at 35 weeks was fine, it may not mean this one certainly will be (all babies are different as you know)
Consider all of the options, maybe knowing more about how your baby is developing further down the line will help you decide nearer the time

Whatever you choose, knowing both sides always helps!

Thank you! I agree! Lots of considering to do. My son was actually 37 weeks at birth, an fine but like you said all babies are different. I just find it odd because it's not routine in Canada to give steroid shots unless baby is under 37 weeks.

 

[AP]

Where I am, you don't even get them after 34 weeks. 38 weeks does seem quite odd if theres no particular reason apart from that gestation.

 

[misspriss]

FYI, there is a thread on the preemie/NICU board right now about a baby born at 38 weeks in the NICU for over 3 weeks due to immature lungs. Granted, the mom had GD and that was probably what caused it, but still.

Having had a preemie in the NICU (we did get the steroid shots, as he was 33 weeks), I would not wish it on anyone.

I'm as natural as it gets, non-vaxx, breastfeeding, cosleeping, cloth diapering...but if a doctor told me in his professional opinion that I needed the steroid shots at 38 weeks, I would have them, if there was a risk of a NICU stay again. I would have a serious discussion with your doctor about why he is worried the lungs are underdeveloped? Did he see something on a scan? Professional experience? Or is he just being over precautious?

Going back, I would probably decline the antibiotics because I was "GBS unknown"...but I would do the steriods again. 37-38 weeks is early term BTW, not full term. 39 would be considered full term.

 

[jenmcn1]

FYI, there is a thread on the preemie/NICU board right now about a baby born at 38 weeks in the NICU for over 3 weeks due to immature lungs. Granted, the mom had GD and that was probably what caused it, but still.

Having had a preemie in the NICU (we did get the steroid shots, as he was 33 weeks), I would not wish it on anyone.

I'm as natural as it gets, non-vaxx, breastfeeding, cosleeping, cloth diapering...but if a doctor told me in his professional opinion that I needed the steroid shots at 38 weeks, I would have them, if there was a risk of a NICU stay again. I would have a serious discussion with your doctor about why he is worried the lungs are underdeveloped? Did he see something on a scan? Professional experience? Or is he just being over precautious?

Going back, I would probably decline the antibiotics because I was "GBS unknown"...but I would do the steriods again. 37-38 weeks is early term BTW, not full term. 39 would be considered full term.

Yes I imagine at early gestation there would be a huge need for the steroid shot. My baby is healthy, no issues, he didn't see anythig wrong on the scan at all. Just a precaution. No reason for it. I don't have GD or any other health risks. Every baby and every pregnancy is different I know. In Canada 37 weeks is considered full term. Every country differs on this. With my first child they induced me and waited until I was 37 weeks, in their words... I was full term. I would take the steroid shot if baby was at risk, and the doctor expressed concern. But at this point there is no risks. It seems premature for him to be talking like this and I just don't see the point.

 

[misspriss]

FYI, there is a thread on the preemie/NICU board right now about a baby born at 38 weeks in the NICU for over 3 weeks due to immature lungs. Granted, the mom had GD and that was probably what caused it, but still.

Having had a preemie in the NICU (we did get the steroid shots, as he was 33 weeks), I would not wish it on anyone.

I'm as natural as it gets, non-vaxx, breastfeeding, cosleeping, cloth diapering...but if a doctor told me in his professional opinion that I needed the steroid shots at 38 weeks, I would have them, if there was a risk of a NICU stay again. I would have a serious discussion with your doctor about why he is worried the lungs are underdeveloped? Did he see something on a scan? Professional experience? Or is he just being over precautious?

Going back, I would probably decline the antibiotics because I was "GBS unknown"...but I would do the steriods again. 37-38 weeks is early term BTW, not full term. 39 would be considered full term.

Yes I imagine at early gestation there would be a huge need for the steroid shot. My baby is healthy, no issues, he didn't see anythig wrong on the scan at all. Just a precaution. No reason for it. I don't have GD or any other health risks. Every baby and every pregnancy is different I know. In Canada 37 weeks is considered full term. Every country differs on this. With my first child they induced me and waited until I was 37 weeks, in their words... I was full term. I would take the steroid shot if baby was at risk, and the doctor expressed concern. But at this point there is no risks. It seems premature for him to be talking like this and I just don't see the point.

Well you are the mommy, so I guess you can go with how you feel about it with the steroids. No right or wrong answer, just offering my opinion based on my experiences and those I have heard about online.

The idea that 37 weeks is full term just came from the general observation that babies born 37+ weeks tended to do okay. The research that has more narrowly defined full term is quite recent. It simply shows people have better outcomes between 39 and 41 weeks than they do between 37 and 38 or over 41 weeks. I'll leave that up to your and your doctor as well.

 

[jenmcn1]

FYI, there is a thread on the preemie/NICU board right now about a baby born at 38 weeks in the NICU for over 3 weeks due to immature lungs. Granted, the mom had GD and that was probably what caused it, but still.

Having had a preemie in the NICU (we did get the steroid shots, as he was 33 weeks), I would not wish it on anyone.

I'm as natural as it gets, non-vaxx, breastfeeding, cosleeping, cloth diapering...but if a doctor told me in his professional opinion that I needed the steroid shots at 38 weeks, I would have them, if there was a risk of a NICU stay again. I would have a serious discussion with your doctor about why he is worried the lungs are underdeveloped? Did he see something on a scan? Professional experience? Or is he just being over precautious?

Going back, I would probably decline the antibiotics because I was "GBS unknown"...but I would do the steriods again. 37-38 weeks is early term BTW, not full term. 39 would be considered full term.

Yes I imagine at early gestation there would be a huge need for the steroid shot. My baby is healthy, no issues, he didn't see anythig wrong on the scan at all. Just a precaution. No reason for it. I don't have GD or any other health risks. Every baby and every pregnancy is different I know. In Canada 37 weeks is considered full term. Every country differs on this. With my first child they induced me and waited until I was 37 weeks, in their words... I was full term. I would take the steroid shot if baby was at risk, and the doctor expressed concern. But at this point there is no risks. It seems premature for him to be talking like this and I just don't see the point.

Well you are the mommy, so I guess you can go with how you feel about it with the steroids. No right or wrong answer, just offering my opinion based on my experiences and those I have heard about online.

The idea that 37 weeks is full term just came from the general observation that babies born 37+ weeks tended to do okay. The research that has more narrowly defined full term is quite recent. It simply shows people have better outcomes between 39 and 41 weeks than they do between 37 and 38 or over 41 weeks. I'll leave that up to your and your doctor as well.

Thanks for your advice. I didn't mean to come across as rude. Just stating what Canada goes by. I would love to go up to 39+ weeks, but I'm not allowed with the type of csection i had las time. I guess my personal experience of having a 37 weeker was much better than some people out there so I guess that's why I'm confused about it all. Ah well. As the date gets closer I will weigh my options in what's best for babe.

 

[AP]

On the other hand, why don't you want the steroids? (just trying to see it from both points of view)

I've had a NICU baby but I am unsure if I would take steroids at this gestation either to be honest, I'd like to know my doctors reasons why.

ETA: I wouldn't take the steroids, thinking about it

 

[misspriss]

FYI, there is a thread on the preemie/NICU board right now about a baby born at 38 weeks in the NICU for over 3 weeks due to immature lungs. Granted, the mom had GD and that was probably what caused it, but still.

Having had a preemie in the NICU (we did get the steroid shots, as he was 33 weeks), I would not wish it on anyone.

I'm as natural as it gets, non-vaxx, breastfeeding, cosleeping, cloth diapering...but if a doctor told me in his professional opinion that I needed the steroid shots at 38 weeks, I would have them, if there was a risk of a NICU stay again. I would have a serious discussion with your doctor about why he is worried the lungs are underdeveloped? Did he see something on a scan? Professional experience? Or is he just being over precautious?

Going back, I would probably decline the antibiotics because I was "GBS unknown"...but I would do the steriods again. 37-38 weeks is early term BTW, not full term. 39 would be considered full term.

Yes I imagine at early gestation there would be a huge need for the steroid shot. My baby is healthy, no issues, he didn't see anythig wrong on the scan at all. Just a precaution. No reason for it. I don't have GD or any other health risks. Every baby and every pregnancy is different I know. In Canada 37 weeks is considered full term. Every country differs on this. With my first child they induced me and waited until I was 37 weeks, in their words... I was full term. I would take the steroid shot if baby was at risk, and the doctor expressed concern. But at this point there is no risks. It seems premature for him to be talking like this and I just don't see the point.

Well you are the mommy, so I guess you can go with how you feel about it with the steroids. No right or wrong answer, just offering my opinion based on my experiences and those I have heard about online.

The idea that 37 weeks is full term just came from the general observation that babies born 37+ weeks tended to do okay. The research that has more narrowly defined full term is quite recent. It simply shows people have better outcomes between 39 and 41 weeks than they do between 37 and 38 or over 41 weeks. I'll leave that up to your and your doctor as well.

Thanks for your advice. I didn't mean to come across as rude. Just stating what Canada goes by. I would love to go up to 39+ weeks, but I'm not allowed with the type of csection i had las time. I guess my personal experience of having a 37 weeker was much better than some people out there so I guess that's why I'm confused about it all. Ah well. As the date gets closer I will weigh my options in what's best for babe.

Well, if I were you, I would research it a bit and present the research to my doctor and ask if you could go to 39. It's not like you are asking to go to 42 or something! Until quite recently that is what the US went by. I'd put my money on it that 75% or more of US doctors still go by it. You still have time, like you say, weigh your options, research, talk it over with your doctor, and good luck!

 

[jenmcn1]

FYI, there is a thread on the preemie/NICU board right now about a baby born at 38 weeks in the NICU for over 3 weeks due to immature lungs. Granted, the mom had GD and that was probably what caused it, but still.

Having had a preemie in the NICU (we did get the steroid shots, as he was 33 weeks), I would not wish it on anyone.

I'm as natural as it gets, non-vaxx, breastfeeding, cosleeping, cloth diapering...but if a doctor told me in his professional opinion that I needed the steroid shots at 38 weeks, I would have them, if there was a risk of a NICU stay again. I would have a serious discussion with your doctor about why he is worried the lungs are underdeveloped? Did he see something on a scan? Professional experience? Or is he just being over precautious?

Going back, I would probably decline the antibiotics because I was "GBS unknown"...but I would do the steriods again. 37-38 weeks is early term BTW, not full term. 39 would be considered full term.

Yes I imagine at early gestation there would be a huge need for the steroid shot. My baby is healthy, no issues, he didn't see anythig wrong on the scan at all. Just a precaution. No reason for it. I don't have GD or any other health risks. Every baby and every pregnancy is different I know. In Canada 37 weeks is considered full term. Every country differs on this. With my first child they induced me and waited until I was 37 weeks, in their words... I was full term. I would take the steroid shot if baby was at risk, and the doctor expressed concern. But at this point there is no risks. It seems premature for him to be talking like this and I just don't see the point.

Well you are the mommy, so I guess you can go with how you feel about it with the steroids. No right or wrong answer, just offering my opinion based on my experiences and those I have heard about online.

The idea that 37 weeks is full term just came from the general observation that babies born 37+ weeks tended to do okay. The research that has more narrowly defined full term is quite recent. It simply shows people have better outcomes between 39 and 41 weeks than they do between 37 and 38 or over 41 weeks. I'll leave that up to your and your doctor as well.

Thanks for your advice. I didn't mean to come across as rude. Just stating what Canada goes by. I would love to go up to 39+ weeks, but I'm not allowed with the type of csection i had las time. I guess my personal experience of having a 37 weeker was much better than some people out there so I guess that's why I'm confused about it all. Ah well. As the date gets closer I will weigh my options in what's best for babe.

Well, if I were you, I would research it a bit and present the research to my doctor and ask if you could go to 39. It's not like you are asking to go to 42 or something! Until quite recently that is what the US went by. I'd put my money on it that 75% or more of US doctors still go by it. You still have time, like you say, weigh your options, research, talk it over with your doctor, and good luck!

I really wish I could go longer than 38 weeks but I am at huge risk for uterine rupture if I go into labour on my own. Due to the previous type of csection I had, my midwife also agrees with this. Since I've had 2 other kids, chances of me going into labour before 39 weeks is a possibility. We will see though. Definitely doing my research. Thank you so much

 

[jenmcn1]

On the other hand, why don't you want the steroids? (just trying to see it from both points of view)

I've had a NICU baby but I am unsure if I would take steroids at this gestation either to be honest, I'd like to know my doctors reasons why.

ETA: I wouldn't take the steroids, thinking about it

Well it's more to do with what preservatives are in the steroids. Not very one will agree with me on my concerns. With all the drugs going into my system with my csection, I just don't want another intervention. Of course if something was wrong with baby or I was in preterm labour that would be different. I would take the shot. I've had a 37 weeker and no issues. Of course that doesn't mean there aren't 37 wreckers that have issues. I just don't understand his reasons for it. In fact there are no reasons for him doing this at all. And in Canada this isn't in the norm to give steroids for a 38 weeker

 

[AP]

On the other hand, why don't you want the steroids? (just trying to see it from both points of view)

I've had a NICU baby but I am unsure if I would take steroids at this gestation either to be honest, I'd like to know my doctors reasons why.

ETA: I wouldn't take the steroids, thinking about it

Well it's more to do with what preservatives are in the steroids. Not very one will agree with me on my concerns. With all the drugs going into my system with my csection, I just don't want another intervention. Of course if something was wrong with baby or I was in preterm labour that would be different. I would take the shot. I've had a 37 weeker and no issues. Of course that doesn't mean there aren't 37 wreckers that have issues. I just don't understand his reasons for it. In fact there are no reasons for him doing this at all. And in Canada this isn't in the norm to give steroids for a 38 weeker

If he has no reason then it's a very personal decision left up to you hun. I would get a second opinion too, just to help.

 

[coffee cake]

I believe that 37 weeks was considered "full term" on an international level until very recently. Birthing at 37 weeks is actually more problematic than going 2 weeks overdue (42 weeks) which I know Canada would tell you you aren't even ALLOWED to do. There are only recent findings showing that 37-38 weeks truly isn't full term and poses some risk, as babies are naturally more likely to need a much longer gestation period. And because this isn't a natural onset of labor, where baby WAS just fully baked early, I completely understand your doctor wanting to inject the steroids.

I would be inclined to do further research, ask him what the risks are with the shot, and go from there. 38 weeks seems much too early to me, as a mama that births all her babies overdue by a week at least.


Good luck!

 

[jenmcn1]

I believe that 37 weeks was considered "full term" on an international level until very recently. Birthing at 37 weeks is actually more problematic than going 2 weeks overdue (42 weeks) which I know Canada would tell you you aren't even ALLOWED to do. There are only recent findings showing that 37-38 weeks truly isn't full term and poses some risk, as babies are naturally more likely to need a much longer gestation period. And because this isn't a natural onset of labor, where baby WAS just fully baked early, I completely understand your doctor wanting to inject the steroids.

I would be inclined to do further research, ask him what the risks are with the shot, and go from there. 38 weeks seems much too early to me, as a mama that births all her babies overdue by a week at least.


Good luck!

Oh I totally 100% agree with you!! If I wa having a natural birth I would be allowed to go to 42 weeks wit my midwife. Oh how I wish I could have that. I will be talking to my midwife about the steroid shot, and as much a I respect my doctor I will probably take my mid wife's opinion to heart more than the doctors opinion. If she says get the steroid shot I will do it for sure. I agree that 38 weeks is still too early. I'm just not allowed to go past that with my history, which my midwife even agrees with. Definitely weighing the pros and cons of this

 

[Pinga]

I had my last delivered by C-section at 37+ 4. They thought he was 13 lbs but was 9lbs 10, which is bigger enough!
I had the steroid shots the day before to help mature his lungs. He was born healthy with apgar score 9/10. He has continued to thrive ever since! Would do it again in a flash if I had to with this one.

 

[jenmcn1]

I had my last delivered by C-section at 37+ 4. They thought he was 13 lbs but was 9lbs 10, which is bigger enough!
I had the steroid shots the day before to help mature his lungs. He was born healthy with apgar score 9/10. He has continued to thrive ever since! Would do it again in a flash if I had to with this one.

Good to know, thank you

 

[Boothh]

There is a dispute with my due date so according to the hospital records I will be 38 weeks when I have my section even though I will really be 39 weeks and my consultant had insisted on steroids and said any c section before 39 weeks that is planned steroids is a condition at our hospital x