42 week pregnancy - advice!

rozeepozee

Jo_R wrote:

Oooh Kimberley the conversations I have had about this with sooo many people!

Other comments include, "how long will they LET you go?", "Don't you HAVE to be induced after 41/42 weeks?" and "what's the furthest you'll be ALLOWED to go?"

Basically the simple explanation to what you are saying is "they" advise and recommend. It's me that decides, it's my choice, and I can listen to them talk about induction for hours (as they like to!) but at the end of the day it's me who says what's happening, not them -and it's the same for anyone.

I have read too many stories about women having various things done that they weren't happy with because (and I quote) "I didn't realise I had a choice." It makes me feel really sad that anyone thinks that because a doctor says the hospital policy is induction after 42 weeks, that they HAVE to have an induction.

The thing is, some doctors/midwives would have you believe you didn't have a choice in the way they phrase things - but I think that's more to cover their backs in case you choose something that goes against guidelines because obviously they'd be the ones questioned about the advice they gave to you.

Tbh I don't feel too different to how I felt at 39/40 weeks and things are fine in there so am happy to wait! But on that note I think things might be happening... Let's wait and see!:j

Well pointed out, Jo. As a lawyer who specialized in this area of law, an individual has to CONSENT to medical treatment. It cannot be forced on you. One of the rare exceptions to this is when one is detained under the Mental Health Act. Let's hope it doesn't come to that, eh? Call me quick if it does! :rotfl: (maybe pregnant women could be a whole new area of practice???!!!)

jellyhead

lol!

is it happening yet jo?

one thing i hadn't realised about being induced is that once you go in you don't come out without the baby - i thought i'd be able to go home! you hear so much about women who go the hospital thinking they are in labour being sent home for a few hours etc. and i thought they wouldn't want me until i was actually in established labour. silly me thought i could have the gel inserted and then go home, and call them if i go into labour. but the gel is a medical treatment and once you have it you can't go home. i was gutted, 3 days of just hanging around the hospital doing nothing (because the gel didn't work) while my husband tried to arrange babysitters for my son. he could only afford to take one week off work and we wanted him to be there after the baby was born - induction could take 5 days and then a section so we didn't want 5 days of his paternity leave wasted while i lay on a hospital bed watching tv.

Jo_R_2

bikerqueen wrote:

There is a fear that the placenta will start to deteriorate after 2 weeks over term, but regular monitoring at the hospital will give her a good idea if this is the case and avoid induction. Also, the dates are based on 28 day cycles and 40 weeks being term, many other first world countries measure it differnetly.

Yep - last scan showed placenta is fine, we know baby is fine from scan and monitoring as well. Incidentally my cycle is long which is one factor that made me suspect from the off that I would go "over", and in France I believe a full-term pregnancy is 42 weeks which is an interesting thought...

Jo_R_2

rozeepozee wrote:

Well pointed out, Jo. As a lawyer who specialized in this area of law, an individual has to CONSENT to medical treatment. It cannot be forced on you. One of the rare exceptions to this is when one is detained under the Mental Health Act. Let's hope it doesn't come to that, eh? Call me quick if it does! :rotfl: (maybe pregnant women could be a whole new area of practice???!!!)

This is a great point - I have read one story whereby a woman was forced against her will to have a caesarean under the Mental Health Act - as far as I know it's the only case in this country where this has happened. And when you read the story itself, the way it was obtained was decidedly dodgy anyway - she wasn't actually mentally ill at all, but simply disagreed with the doctors looking after her about the course of care: http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/316/7143/1477/g
It's an interesting principle given the conditions of the baby but illustrates the rights of the mother and consent.

Anyhow, no baby for me yet -am keeping at it though and trying everything I can!

Jay-Jay_4

BOO!!!!




......anything?

"oooooooh.... why are we waiting? This is la la la laaaaaa"



**thinking of 'other' ways to encourage baby to gracefully slide out with minimum effort into Mums waiting hands**

mishkanorman

jo, are you sure its in there ?????

might be wind ............................


Mishka

pavlovs_dog

ive got a spare tow rope, we could all get together and play tug of war and drag the babe out that way

rozeepozee

Jo_R wrote:

This is a great point - I have read one story whereby a woman was forced against her will to have a caesarean under the Mental Health Act - as far as I know it's the only case in this country where this has happened. And when you read the story itself, the way it was obtained was decidedly dodgy anyway - she wasn't actually mentally ill at all, but simply disagreed with the doctors looking after her about the course of care: http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/316/7143/1477/g
It's an interesting principle given the conditions of the baby but illustrates the rights of the mother and consent.

I had my midwife appointment yesterday and whilst she is absolutely lovely, I don't get the sense that she is a home birth advocate. She found that my fundus was 1cm higher than expected for my dates and said it would have to be monitored. When I asked what the purpose of the monitoring was she blithely replied "oh, if the baby is big, they may want you in to induce you early". There was no reference to my rights of self-determination in all of this! I'm not going to worry so early in my pregnancy (24 weeks), but if this comes about, I can see me having a similar thread to your's come October!

Hope you are still gestating nicely

Jay-Jay_4

rozeepozee, it's strange isn't it?

We go to the doctors because we can't get better without him/her. We go to the dentist because we can't drill our own teeth and we go to a midwife because we are 'unable' to birth our babies without them.

The fact is that midwife means 'with woman' and in an ideal world we would all feel confident about birthing our own baby so the midwife sould be there to support us and guide us while being trained to help if anything should go wrong. In the real world we submit to the medical profession as soon as we get a positive pregnancy test and we depend for their say so for everything from that point until they discharge us from their care.

When I had my baby at home my husband was scared to pick her up, waiting for acknowledgement from the attending midwives. They were lovely, as are most midwives and they didn't for one minute try to 'take over' but it really is time that women felt confident enough to take back birthing and let midwives get back to their supporting role.

bikerqueen

rozeepozee wrote:

She found that my fundus was 1cm higher than expected for my dates and said it would have to be monitored.

I didnt even get my fundus measured for the first time until about 6 weeks ago...