refusing induction?
- Thread starter sammielou
- Start date
russellmuscle
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2012
- Messages
- 11,994
- Reaction score
- 0
Mine wasn't white either it was dark dark red like a giant liver. I didn't see any white on mine. They never says mine was bad or anything just weighed it and I being the weirdo that I am asked to see it lol.
Mine was 14 days past Edd so maybe mine was old I dunno.
I thought they tested the placebta after to make sure everything was normal?
xxxxx
Mine was 14 days past Edd so maybe mine was old I dunno.
I thought they tested the placebta after to make sure everything was normal?
xxxxx
This is a very interesting thread!!
I am 26+5 with DC/DA Twins, when I asked about labour and getting my birth plan ready I was basically told my options would be induction if I go over 37 weeks and more than likely a C-Section.
This is my first pregnancy and I felt like this was a very interfering route to go down and it was like I had no other option.
After reading a lot about it and having joined a Birthing Naturally FB page, it's made me realise that a complete stranger is supposed to know our bodies better than we do because they have undertaken however many births and not prepared to listen to our wants and needs.
I have come to terms that for me a water birth is not an option and that is fine, but if my babies are still doing well by 38 weeks and everything is ok I don't want medical intervention unless it is unsafe for the babies or myself.
It frustrates me that we aren't even given the option...whats the point in being asked to make our birth plan if we will be told no from the outset!!
Just need to remember that it is our right to be in charge of how we want our babies born.
I am 26+5 with DC/DA Twins, when I asked about labour and getting my birth plan ready I was basically told my options would be induction if I go over 37 weeks and more than likely a C-Section.
This is my first pregnancy and I felt like this was a very interfering route to go down and it was like I had no other option.
After reading a lot about it and having joined a Birthing Naturally FB page, it's made me realise that a complete stranger is supposed to know our bodies better than we do because they have undertaken however many births and not prepared to listen to our wants and needs.
I have come to terms that for me a water birth is not an option and that is fine, but if my babies are still doing well by 38 weeks and everything is ok I don't want medical intervention unless it is unsafe for the babies or myself.
It frustrates me that we aren't even given the option...whats the point in being asked to make our birth plan if we will be told no from the outset!!
Just need to remember that it is our right to be in charge of how we want our babies born.
Last edited:
inky
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2009
- Messages
- 5,915
- Reaction score
- 0
Having seen both sides, I think common sense and circumstance should dictate here. My son was born naturally at 40+12 after I refused induction on numerous occasions. Medically there was no reason for him to be induced, he was still growing, happy and health. It was his time to be born weighing 7lb 11oz and nature had taken its course. Lovely. My daughter however, stopped growing at 37 weeks. This time I listened to what the doctors were saying to me and agreed an early induction at 38 weeks. The induction itself was very straightforward, I didn't need the drip and she was born 11 hours after the process was inserted. I didn't need any pain relief other than gas and air and found the 'natural' birth of my son to be far more lengthy and traumatic. With baby number 3 I shall just carry on as before - if, medically, there is a reason to induce then it's a no-brainer, but if baby is happy and still growing then I'll wait for labour to start naturally. Sadly you can't always plan these things in advance!
I don't know where this idea came from that birth has to be forced or managed. Could you imagine cracking open an egg to remove the chick? Or ripping open a chrysalis to take out the butterfly? Biology trumps medicine in this one. Induction is VERY VERY rarely needed. Being impatient or "over" by days or even a couple weeks are not reasons to induce. I'll refuse induction unless my baby is in serious trouble. Which is very very unlikely.
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2014
- Messages
- 734
- Reaction score
- 3
I believe that the NHS is between a rock and a hard place.
They obviously do not want anything to happen to our babies. I have heard lots of negative stories about being left to wait until baby is ready, but also having an induction.
As this thread obviously shows, it's a personal choice, but I think I am going to mainly place my faith in the NHS, whilst keeping my wits about me and not being forced into anything we don't want to happen. At the same time, I am not a medical expert and so I will listen to my midwife and take her advice, which up until now has been top notch.
There has to be a balance, doesn't there? I would feel uncomfortable about refusing something they say is best for me, so long as I understand their reasonings behind it.
I know many, many friends who had their babies without induction who had absolutely horrifically long labours and ended up with c-section!
Genuinely interested; what are the statistics? Are you more likely to have a c section if you have an induction?
In the end, as everyone else here has said, I want my baby to be born happy and healthy. I am second to it, in my opinion! whatever it takes to get it here safely and healthily, I will do.
They obviously do not want anything to happen to our babies. I have heard lots of negative stories about being left to wait until baby is ready, but also having an induction.
As this thread obviously shows, it's a personal choice, but I think I am going to mainly place my faith in the NHS, whilst keeping my wits about me and not being forced into anything we don't want to happen. At the same time, I am not a medical expert and so I will listen to my midwife and take her advice, which up until now has been top notch.
There has to be a balance, doesn't there? I would feel uncomfortable about refusing something they say is best for me, so long as I understand their reasonings behind it.
I know many, many friends who had their babies without induction who had absolutely horrifically long labours and ended up with c-section!
Genuinely interested; what are the statistics? Are you more likely to have a c section if you have an induction?
In the end, as everyone else here has said, I want my baby to be born happy and healthy. I am second to it, in my opinion! whatever it takes to get it here safely and healthily, I will do.
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2014
- Messages
- 734
- Reaction score
- 3
Just seen this. Interesting. They are very upfront on NHS website.
Side effects of induction of labour
One in every five births in the UK in 2004-05 were induced, according to NICE. Among these induced births, when labour was started using drugs:
less than two-thirds of these women gave birth without further intervention
about 15% had instrumental (assisted) births (such as forceps or ventouse)
22% had emergency caesarean sections
Side effects of induction of labour
One in every five births in the UK in 2004-05 were induced, according to NICE. Among these induced births, when labour was started using drugs:
less than two-thirds of these women gave birth without further intervention
about 15% had instrumental (assisted) births (such as forceps or ventouse)
22% had emergency caesarean sections
glowing
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2013
- Messages
- 1,327
- Reaction score
- 0
There are many reasons for induction and they are not advised without serious consideration. As there are risks associated. There are medical reasons such as pre - eclampsia, obstetric cholestasis, lack of growth, reduced fluid, cord flow reduced, lack of movements, abnormal CTG monitoring, gestational diabetes all with risks to the fetus or mother. I am sure any mother who is being asked to consider induction of labour due to these reasons would weigh up the benefits of medical intervention against the risks of induction failing, increased risk of instrumental delivery or c - section. I would say in this world now of Hi - tech care and screening there are far more high risk pregnancies than ever before and medical problems are far more common than ever before so to say that induction of labour is rarely needed or likely to happen is blinkered. Sorry.
I would certainly agree there are good reasons for induction. I also think the danger of living in 'a world of Hi - tech care and screening' is that it doesnt always make pregnancy and birth safer. There is a lot of disagreement amongst doctors about things like OC, lack of growth and gd being good reasons to induce. Some tests are known to be highly unreliable. Personally I would consider carefully the real risks and benefits of an induction before following blindly the opinion of the first Doctor I spoke to. Often research is vague or nonexistent and in some cases there is a landslide of evidence to show that the current policy of induction for a particular reason is infact unwarranted and increases risks rather than reduces them. Unfortunately once a policy or common practice is in in place it can take many years to change. I for example was advised I would need an induction for a large baby. Research has shown there is actually a bigger risk from being diagnosed (even when the baby turns out not to be big) with a big baby than actually having one 
.
.
Last edited:
