March 2018 Baby Club

boardsuser1

Toots wrote: »

I started having contractions at 26 weeks, was admitted to hospital, got the steroids etc but it all calmed down and I was let home. In and out a lot in the following weeks til they were happy things were stable but was warned it was unlikely I'd go to term...

My son arrived at 41 weeks on the button. Went into labour at 40+5 and he was born at 41 exactly!

I've 2 weeks to go but apparently her head is so far down now my GP said he'd be shocked if I end up going full term.

Were the steroids administered by an iv line?

The reason i ask is the wife believes this is how they stopped her labour.

You went over term so, the hospital staff have had that scenario with our kids previously as well.

Do you think you'll be posting news by the of the week based on how you are?

boardsuser1

Just in the door from 1 of the scans which are to be conducted every 48 hours.

Consultant is very very happy.

Twins both roughly 4 and a half pounds each with 6 weeks left.

Vessels are raised on T1 and the sonographer noted in the file it was a difficult scan.

Warnings have been given to take it easy to avoid the onset of labour again.

Twin 2 is Cephalic and twin 1 breech posterior lower according to the file, the MIL is here sorting and separating all the stuff and bagging them,she insisted, so the bags are almost at the ready now in case the real thing occurs.

God knows we've had plenty of practice runs in recent weeks.

Hope you are all well.

Toots

Cork Truck Driver wrote: »

Were the steroids administered by an iv line?

The reason i ask is the wife believes this is how they stopped her labour.

No, it was 2 shots in the arse administered 12 hours apart. :pac: For some reason given with the biggest needle I've ever seen (maybe so it goes right into the muscle?) and it was really weird because there was the most intense burning sensation travelling all down my leg as they spread.

Do you think you'll be posting news by the of the week based on how you are?

Oh god I hope so, but I bet I won't! Family started a pool today on when they think she'll be born. My son reckons tomorrow - I like his optimism, but I suspect he's a bit too optimistic. My sister's OH said 3rd of Feb, so I told him if I go overdue now it's his fault :pac:

Glad to hear things have calmed down a bit with your two. Good to have the bags packed, at least it's one less thing to have to worry about when the time comes - just leave them by the front door ready to grab!

boardsuser1

Toots wrote: »

No, it was 2 shots in the arse administered 12 hours apart. :pac: For some reason given with the biggest needle I've ever seen (maybe so it goes right into the muscle?) and it was really weird because there was the most intense burning sensation travelling all down my leg as they spread.


Oh god I hope so, but I bet I won't! Family started a pool today on when they think she'll be born. My son reckons tomorrow - I like his optimism, but I suspect he's a bit too optimistic. My sister's OH said 3rd of Feb, so I told him if I go overdue now it's his fault :pac:

Glad to hear things have calmed down a bit with your two. Good to have the bags packed, at least it's one less thing to have to worry about when the time comes - just leave them by the front door ready to grab!

That needle in question was given to herself also for strengthening the babies lungs, i assume they were expecting a delivery to give it to you?twas a large needle, well the first one i seen,,she said she felt nothing, the second hurt apparently even though i wasn't there for it.

Possibly the liquid travelling down the leg muscle as you say?

Your son might be right

My daughter is saying our twins will arrive on the 25th, my MIL's birthday :pac:


Give him a bollocking if you do :pac::pac::pac:

The 2 suitcases (1 for wife,1 for kids) are sitting in the front room for now as the hall is cluttered with my little boys toys as that's where he tends to leave them.

You are on the home straight now so it'll be over and done with before you know it

Third_Echelon

My wife is due on 30 March. Just at 30 weeks now....

The past few months have just flown in! It's our first one, so just did the big shop at the weekend just gone to kit the place out! Wallet is on fire

Getting exciting now!

boardsuser1

Has anyone here experience of twins turning late on?

33 weeks in now and twin 1 is breech, seems to be permanently that way at this stage.

Twin 2 was cephalic (head down) mid uterus last week and after the wife spent the bulk of a full day in bed it is now transverse.

Consultant now this day week at 34 weeks.

laylag

Has everyone had a glucose test? I'm 30 weeks and no word of it happening yet!

Toots

A lot of hospitals will only do it if you've got the risk factors for it, like if you're over 35 or your BMI is outside the "normal" range.

laylag

Toots wrote:

A lot of hospitals will only do it if you've got the risk factors for it, like if you're over 35 or your BMI is outside the "normal" range.

Thanks...I was starting to worry they had forgotten about me!!

Toots

As far as I know the risk factors are:

• Age over 35
• BMI above 30
• You previously had gestational diabetes
• Someone in your immediate family has diabetes
• You previously had a baby that weighed over 10lbs at birth
• You have Polycystic Ovaries
• Your ethnicity is Asian, Chinese, Afro-Caribbean or Middle Eastern

Even if you don't have any of these risk factors, if your baby is measuring big on scans, or if glucose is detected in your urine during your antenatal appointments, they may give you a glucose test just to rule out GD.

michellie

Yea they normally do the GT at about 28 weeks. I had mine then, all went ok!

Struggling in work, so shattered, uncomfortable and pain if I'm standing too long. Only a few days left, hope I can last !

jadie

laylag wrote: »

Has everyone had a glucose test? I'm 30 weeks and no word of it happening yet!

Nope, twas only mentioned to be at the booking appointment as an option (I'm over 35) but nothing since then.

California Dreamer

Third_Echelon wrote: »

My wife is due on 30 March. Just at 30 weeks now....

The past few months have just flown in! It's our first one, so just did the big shop at the weekend just gone to kit the place out! Wallet is on fire

Getting exciting now!

My wallet exploded weeks ago and now it laughs at me anytime I go to open it!!!!

irelandrover

California Dreamer wrote: »

My wallet exploded weeks ago and now it laughs at me anytime I go to open it!!!!

I finished decorating the nursery tonight. The house is full of stuff. Everywhere i look has something. We even ignored quite a lot of stuff on the lists we were given.

Its our first child but how can something so so small need so much stuff.

California Dreamer

irelandrover wrote: »

I finished decorating the nursery tonight. The house is full of stuff. Everywhere i look has something. We even ignored quite a lot of stuff on the lists we were given.

Its our first child but how can something so so small need so much stuff.

Well I don't think we need nursery for the first 6 months but spent a fortune in ikea a few weeks ago. Managed to get plenty of Tommy Tippee stuff on sale over the last few months.

irelandrover

California Dreamer wrote: »

Well I don't think we need nursery for the first 6 months but spent a fortune in ikea a few weeks ago. Managed to get plenty of Tommy Tippee stuff on sale over the last few months.

Don't think we need the nursery yet either but i decided it was easier do it now than when i was highly sleep deprived in a few months

boardsuser1

Is there much difference in birth plans for twins compared to single babies, ours is next Monday, no idea what to expect.

shesty

Well if they are early there will probably be incubator units in the room, maybe doctors for each baby?Is this a csection or what is it?

I will edit this to suggest (I never, ever, ever would suggest this, but it's not your first rodeo CTD!) There are episodes of "one born every minute"on twin births out there, if you wanted to google and get a rough idea of how it might go.......

There.I said it.

boardsuser1

shesty wrote: »

Well if they are early there will probably be incubator units in the room, maybe doctors for each baby?Is this a csection or what is it?

She's 34 weeks (almost) so they are as good as full term now for twins.

Section has been lightly hinted at by one of the sonographers, as Twin 1, however they can tell the difference with them being 1 and 2 i don't know, anyway There is one of them breech posterior, the other one is head down.

I know people reading this will possibly not be happy with what i am writing, i have said it here before, my wife has made it very very clear that a section is completely off the cards.

When she was admitted with premature labour recently, they were getting her ready for delivery at one stage before stopping it, she was going to be delivering naturally then.

No issues with any of the previous pregnancies.

From talking to people out in the hospital,section's are slowly on the rise there, purely for convenience than anything else, a labour or breech delivery could take a while, a section 45 minutes.

I was present for a section with someone a number of years ago so this is not the first time i've seen this tried.

When the sonographer was asked is a section mandatory, she said it's "preferred"

That hospital seem to have a policy that if you have a section once, you'll have them forever more.

I've seen One Born Every Minute a few times, They delivery twins vaginally in all methods.

Breech forceps etc etc.

shesty

Well I guess you kind of know then.You just go in and aim to give birth pretty much. I'd imagine there might be a couple of extra people knocking around the room, both for the babies and possibly to assist in the delivery but I don't really know what else.

As for the Section thing....if (for example) one twin is in and one twin is out and the only way to get it out safely is a section, then that's an on the spot decision that you have no way of predicting.All she can do now is go in aiming for a natural birth and see how it works out really. Sections are preferred for breech deliveries but I can't see any problem with aiming to start the process naturally and see how it goes.Maybe once one comes the other will turn.Who knows.

boardsuser1

shesty wrote: »

Well I guess you kind of know then.You just go in and aim to give birth pretty much. I'd imagine there might be a couple of extra people knocking around the room, both for the babies and possibly to assist in the delivery but I don't really know what else.

As for the Section thing....if (for example) one twin is in and one twin is out and the only way to get it out safely is a section, then that's an on the spot decision that you have no way of predicting.All she can do now is go in aiming for a natural birth and see how it works out really.

Yeah, the aim is to go in and go naturally.

I've heard the stories of one naturally and the other isn't.

4% chance of that happening i think.

The room will be full of people.

What we do know is, the breech baby is not blocking the birth canal.

This is the disadvantage we have of having no history of twins on either side, we don't know what to expect.

shesty

Yeah but to be fair nobody knows what to expect going in.I'm on my third here, and I have no clue what will happen.As you know yourself, you'll have to just go in with that as your expectation-aim for natural and see how it turns out.

boardsuser1

shesty wrote: »

Yeah but to be fair nobody knows what to expect going in.I'm on my third here, and I have no clue what will happen.As you know yourself, you'll have to just go in with that as your expectation-aim for natural and see how it turns out.

Each pregnancy is different, you’re correct.

Is this one very different from 1 & 2 for you?

Our 3 previous have all been rapid, almost didn’t make it on number 2.

Yeah the (unofficial) plan is natural. Haven’t a hope in hell if making March as week 38 is on February 28th.

If they mention induction she’s asking will they hold off 24 hours to bring it to March but based on her history,looks remote.

All my kids are born in either February or September, so a new month would be a nice change.

spottybananas

I do agree with you Cork Truck Driver that medical professionals are very quick to suggest c sections now when it is the easier quicker option rather than medically necessary these days, leading to problems now like midwives and doctors inexperienced with breech births etc, so then they suggest c section, meaning less experience of it, vicious circle. So I do think that all going well your partner is right to be aiming for a natural birth but accepting that a c section may be necessary if there's an urgent medical need.

When I was waiting to have my first son in the labour ward another woman I know gave birth to one twin naturally and had to have a csection for the second twin (I'm not sure why, I could only hear so much next door!), which has to be the worst of both worlds, every bit of you would be sore! She was still moving better than me though when we met in scbu the day after.

shesty

It's quite different in terms of symptoms.Both births were different, waters went first in one followed by contractions, but put up with weeks of contractions before no.2.before anything productive actually happened at 42 weeks.Waters never broke on the second.Similarities were that both were not overly long, 7 & 5 hours, both were just gas and air, no interventions in either, and no major events really happened during either.(the aftermath of no.1 was a different story due to waters going first).

No.2 turned from head down to up a number of times from about 32 weeks to 36 weeks which was pretty awful. I don't how this one will go, it feels like it"s rotating a bit in there (although it still has space).Hoping it ends up head down and stays that way though.After that, I'll settle for another similar birth to the last two, but sure who knows.

boardsuser1

spottybananas wrote: »

I do agree with you Cork Truck Driver that medical professionals are very quick to suggest c sections now when it is the easier quicker option rather than medically necessary these days, leading to problems now like midwives and doctors inexperienced with breech births etc, so then they suggest c section, meaning less experience of it, vicious circle. So I do think that all going well your partner is right to be aiming for a natural birth but accepting that a c section may be necessary if there's an urgent medical need.

When I was waiting to have my first son in the labour ward another woman I know gave birth to one twin naturally and had to have a csection for the second twin (I'm not sure why, I could only hear so much next door!), which has to be the worst of both worlds, every bit of you would be sore! She was still moving better than me though when we met in scbu the day after.

Thanks Spotty,

It's like a quick get out of jail card for them.

A point i made previously was, a section takes roughly 45 minutes from start to finish, a woman in labour could be there for hours, even days in some cases, this just makes life easier for the 'professionals' without having a care in the world for the consequences.

They don't go home every night thinking 'Was i right or wrong to section that lady'

We will see the answers we get now next week when a request for a breech delivery is made after they formally propose the section.

Twin 1 Naturally/Twin 2 section must be an awful recovery, i can only imagine what it must have been like for you seeing that scenario, i certainly haven't.



In 2016, a lady with 3 previous sections refused a 4th initially, the HSE tried to force her via court proceedings and the judge refused.

She did have the procedure done, but the HSE were left with egg on their faces and it has set a precedent now.

Women's rights 1-0 HSE

https://www.rte.ie/news/2016/1102/828700-c-section-court/

boardsuser1

shesty wrote: »

It's quite different in terms of symptoms.Both births were different, waters went first in one followed by contractions, but put up with weeks of contractions before no.2.before anything productive actually happened at 42 weeks.Waters never broke on the second.Similarities were that both were not overly long, 7 & 5 hours, both were just gas and air, no interventions in either, and no major events really happened during either.(the aftermath of no.1 was a different story due to waters going first).

No.2 turned from head down to up a number of times from about 32 weeks to 36 weeks which was pretty awful. I don't how this one will go, it feels like it"s rotating a bit in there (although it still has space).Hoping it ends up head down and stays that way though.After that, I'll settle for another similar birth to the last two, but sure who knows.

Did you find your labour progressed quicker after the waters went?

With our kids for example, the waters broke on 1 & 2 naturally, labour was very quick, on number 3 the contractions/show came but the waters didn't.

In the hospital under midwifery instruction she was told to push to break the waters, our son was born 3 minutes later.

You went to 42 weeks? wow :eek:

Those were very respectable times you had,same as my wife, gas and air only and a few stitches inside and out afterwards.

At which stage did number 2 finally settle? 36 weeks?

At this stage you probably do still have enough room for baby to turn and get ready for the big day.

Number 1 didn't turn down until 37 weeks for us and she was born 6 days later.

shesty

Ah god no.It was my first so they went, an hour later contractions started and six hours later she appeared.I'd imagine being the first, she was going to take a bit longer anyway.

My second...no.I've never been told to push. Honestly they leave me to it and that's what I want!!!I was upright, and just going along with it.I definitely remember reaching a point where I wasn't sure I could keep going and the midwife saying to me if I could lie down he would check how far along I was.Tried lying down, wasn't happening and next thing I shot upright and two big pushes got her out.She was born in the sac.But no, as long as I seemed to be coping, he didn't say anything much.

Yes hoping this baby is head down when itdecides it's had enough of turning !!!

boardsuser1

shesty wrote: »

Ah god no.It was my first so they went, an hour later contractions started and six hours later she appeared.I'd imagine being the first, she was going to take a bit longer anyway.

My second...no.I've never been told to push. Honestly they leave me to it and that's what I want!!!I was upright, and just going along with it.I definitely remember reaching a point where I wasn't sure I could keep going and the midwife saying to me if I could lie down he would check how far along I was.Tried lying down, wasn't happening and next thing I shot upright and two big pushes got her out.She was born in the sac.But no, as long as I seemed to be coping, he didn't say anything much.

Yes hoping this baby is head down when itdecides it's had enough of turning !!!

6 hours on a first isn't bad, based on what i have seen over the years first hand, often seen woman in labour for days.

Many women prefer to be left to do their own thing in that situation, and understandably so!

Your most recent experience was the same as the wife last time out, couldn't lay down, just kneeling over the back of the bed,2 or 3 pushed and he arrived, with a heavily bruised face mind you.

Is the baby still made turning?

We were in the hospital yesterday and the wife got very cross, a 2.30 scan turned in a 4.45 scan and a 4.30 clinic appointment became 5.30.

Been at the hospital since 2pm.

No discussion of a birth plan to our suprise.

The doctor just said "All 3 previous births natural,Twin 1 breech"

She didn't elaborate on that.

Both babies are now nearing the 6lb mark and 4 weeks to go,6 if you go on the 40 week dating scan.

Highly unlikely i'll be in the March thread,unless the babies come of their own accord in the month of February, a March date is being insisted upon she said, even March 1st.

A new month for a new birthday is a preference for us all really.

California Dreamer

Question on the public thing and I have to say the care in the coombe has been great once you are actually seen.

But what is with the handing out appointments and then having to wait 3 hours. Most people I have seen are in and out in 10 minutes, why can they not stagger the appointments out across the day?

I am sure all these questions have been asked before, but sure I am only the father what would I know?