Faster labor with #2?

[Anonymous]

First was about 20 hours, the second 6 hours and much easier delivery - almost a breeze compared to no. 1.

[Anonymous]

My first labor was 24 hrs +.
Second labor was 12 hrs, so I guess you could say it was faster, though still not fast at all!

Anecdotally, my friends who have fast deliveries seem to have them for all their children. A good friend had her first very quickly, and second even faster - he was born at home before they could even get to the hospital!

[Anonymous]

Both of my labors started in the early am (about 4 am) and I was fully dialated by about 1 pm. Pushed for 4 hours with number 1 (huge head, didn't really push effectively). Pushed for about 1 hour with #2 (also a huge head, but I really focused that time). Never felt urge to push with either (and I had no meds either time). So the pushing part all seemed kind of artificial to me both times.

[Anonymous]

#1 - 3 1/2 hours of active labor, 2 1/2 hours of pushing. #2 - 2 1/2 hours of active labor, 20 minutes of pushing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:39 weeks is the latest recommendation for when an OB should do a c-section. If they do them any earlier than that the risks increase to the baby.

OP here-- yep, it is scheduled for 39 weeks exactly. I am crossing my fingers that I will make it that long, but I didn't with #1. Don't know if that means anything, though. Thanks everyone for your input... some interesting birth stories here!!