How overdue would you be allowed to go?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“‘Think like a fetus.’ If a fetus knew that the literature says there’s no benefit for staying in past 39 weeks, and potential risks increase after 39 weeks, wouldn’t the fetus want to be delivered at 39 weeks?

Multiple studies from the United Kingdom and the United States showed that infant mortality risk increases after 39 weeks. Stillbirth rates are at their lowest at 39 weeks and increase significantly after that. The reason is unknown.”

https://annualmeeting.acog.org/news/support-for-elective-iol-at-39-weeks-growing/

Nothing good happens after 39 weeks. Stillbirth rates go up, preeclampsia rates go up, the baby gains a lot more weight and can be harder to deliver vaginally, the placenta can start to break down, amniotic fluid levels can decrease, etc.

I would push for an induction date, stat OP. There is zero benefit to waiting until 42 weeks.

This is a confused post. "Think like a fetus" and evict a fetus rather than letting nature run its course? I do believe that medical advances benefit us on many ways by allowing us to override nature when we believe we know better, but a major question of this thread is whether to make a decision based on certain study findings vs individualized care and observation. For some, there IS a benefit to waiting until 42 weeks (not all 42 weekers are 10lbs) and/or there are greater risks associated with induction. I'd be cautious about assuming evolution got its gestational calculator wholly wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
41 weeks tops.
After that, studies show that fetal mortality rises sharply in the 42nd week.

Is it clear whether this is caused by keeping the baby inside longer? Does inducing at 41 improve outcomes?

[Anonymous]

I think There are a lot Of unrecognized brain injuries among babies who cooked too long. The same way there are problems for babies who stew too little. 200 years ago, too long or too short would have just died or delivered as still birth.

If we have access to medicine and care that can prevent too early or too late, why not take advantage of them? The result in both cases is a healthy baby.

[Anonymous]

10 days past my due date. I'm relatively small and knew that the baby was growing and kept asking to be induced. Finally Dr. induced and I delivered a 10lb baby- crazy tough delivery and Dr. said I would have c-section on future pregnancies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“‘Think like a fetus.’ If a fetus knew that the literature says there’s no benefit for staying in past 39 weeks, and potential risks increase after 39 weeks, wouldn’t the fetus want to be delivered at 39 weeks?

Multiple studies from the United Kingdom and the United States showed that infant mortality risk increases after 39 weeks. Stillbirth rates are at their lowest at 39 weeks and increase significantly after that. The reason is unknown.”

https://annualmeeting.acog.org/news/support-for-elective-iol-at-39-weeks-growing/

Nothing good happens after 39 weeks. Stillbirth rates go up, preeclampsia rates go up, the baby gains a lot more weight and can be harder to deliver vaginally, the placenta can start to break down, amniotic fluid levels can decrease, etc.

I would push for an induction date, stat OP. There is zero benefit to waiting until 42 weeks.

This is a confused post. "Think like a fetus" and evict a fetus rather than letting nature run its course? I do believe that medical advances benefit us on many ways by allowing us to override nature when we believe we know better, but a major question of this thread is whether to make a decision based on certain study findings vs individualized care and observation. For some, there IS a benefit to waiting until 42 weeks (not all 42 weekers are 10lbs) and/or there are greater risks associated with induction. I'd be cautious about assuming evolution got its gestational calculator wholly wrong.

What is the benefit of waiting til 42 weeks, exactly? There is an optimal window for safe delivery. Too early = problems. Too late = problems. Why risk stillbirth if you can safely induce a term baby?

[Anonymous]

Unless you know when you ovulated u don’t really know exactly how long it’s been. The 40 weeks is from last period and while most people are within a relatively small range, some are further out. In those cases 42 weeks might be fine or better than 40. More the exception than the rule though.

[Anonymous]

I was induced at 41+6; failed; ended up having a c section at 42. My doctor told me the rule is not to go pass 42 weeks (in Europe). Good luck.

[Anonymous]

Your doctor or practice might have a preference for how far overdue you go, but please know that it is purely your decision. There is no question of what you're allowed to do. You can do whatever you want, including disagreeing with your doctor.

[Anonymous]

All four of my babies were well overdue (41 weeks plus) and all four were healthy and less than 10lbs. They were stronger and slept better sooner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Unless you know when you ovulated u don’t really know exactly how long it’s been. The 40 weeks is from last period and while most people are within a relatively small range, some are further out. In those cases 42 weeks might be fine or better than 40. More the exception than the rule though.

Sorry but this is nonsense. Dating scans are extremely accurate when done early enough.

[Anonymous]

When I gave birth last year (40+5 after a membrane sweep; first was elective induction at 40+3) all the DC hospitals were overwhelmed and not taking any elective inductions. So you might have to really push to get an induction if you want one.

[Anonymous]

I had just turned 29 and was induced at 41+3. I wanted to wait until 42, but the doctors advised against it. I was induced and ended up with a C section. It all turned out well, but those 2-3 days at the hospital before baby was born were hell. I wish I had waited a few more days and maybe things would have started on their own since I was having irregular contractions already

[Anonymous]

Op here again, I just spoke to my doc office and they are urging me to wait for my body to do this on its own, so I'll try to sit tight until my next appointment with them on Monday. Or go into labor on my own! At the end of the day I think I need to trust the person who's seen me through this pregnancy and my previous one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Op here again, I just spoke to my doc office and they are urging me to wait for my body to do this on its own, so I'll try to sit tight until my next appointment with them on Monday. Or go into labor on my own! At the end of the day I think I need to trust the person who's seen me through this pregnancy and my previous one.

You’re well within your right as a patient to discuss your concerns with your OB, OP. Did you speak to your doctor, or just a nurse? Are you at a practice that is more conservative, or one known to try and minimize interventions? Personally I find it a bit odd that at AMA they are not encouraging you to at least schedule an induction at 40 weeks.

If you are comfortable with the risks of waiting to induce, fine. But you are well within your right to discuss the risks and benefits of inducing or waiting at this point. Plenty of conservative practices would have already induced you by this point. Sometimes our bodies don’t do the right thing and interventions can avoid a bad outcome. Mother Nature is not infallible, she’s the reason birth used to be the leading cause of death for women and babies.

[Anonymous]

Went 1 week 6 days past my DD with the first
1 week past with the second (and that was by far my worst labor & delivery)
10 days past with my third

There may be reasons for concern with waiting, but size isn't one of them. The fetus does put on weight after 36 weeks, but it's fat, not skeleton, and fat is easy to deliver.