Forum Index
»
Expectant and Postpartum Moms
Faster labor with #2?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
|
Is this just a rumor? Everyone told me that labor with the first would be incredibly slow. Not for me. My water broke at 11pm (just prior to 39 weeks) and within an hour, the contractions were hard and fast, just a few minutes apart. I needed a c-section (breech) and they had baby out within 2 hours of my water breaking.
Now I'm closing in on my due date and although it will be a repeat C at 39 weeks, I don't know if I'll make it since I didn't the first time. I can't imagine labor going any faster! So I'm just curious as to what others have experienced with subsequent pregnancies. Thanks in advance for your stories! |
Anonymous
| My first labor was about 6 hours from the first contractions to delivery, and my suggested that the next one would be faster! My second was about indeed about half as long, 3 hours. |
Anonymous
| Well, the good news is that if it does start prior to 39 weeks and it does go super fast, you will be pushing your baby out before they get a chance to give you surgery. Consider it a blessing! Actually, you are a great candidate for a planned VBAC, and there are many doctors and midwives around here who would support that. And just to answer your question, yes, second labors are known for going faster than the first - however since you go through the pushing phase with #1 then I would expect pushing to take as long as it would with a first baby. |
Anonymous
| oops, meant to say that since you didn't go through pushing with your first baby, that the pushing phase for your second would be more like a first baby. |
Anonymous
| OP, did they check your dilation before the c/s (no reason why they should since your c/s was for breech, actually). If you don't know how far you were dilated, what makes you think your labor would've been fast? Just because your contractions were strong and a few minutes apart, doesn't really mean they were causing you to dilate efficiently. If the baby wasn't in a good position, it could've taken many hours, even of hard and fast contractions, to push him/her down. I guess what I am saying is that since you didn't give birth vaginally, I don't know if you can just assume that your labor would've been fast. My contractions were coming on hard and fast (with the help of pitocin, but still), and it still took 14 hours to dilate all the way and then 2 fruitless hours of pushing before the c/s for failure to descend. |
Anonymous
Nope, at 37 weeks #2 is also breech. I am not a good candidate for a VBAC due to a uterine abnormality and very close births (15 months apart), and I'm not willing to risk it. That's why I am very nervous about starting to labor. |
Anonymous
|
Mine were both 12 hours. Number 2 did progress more quickly at the beginning and then stalled and ended up lasting just as long as the first.
good luck. |
Anonymous
|
OP again-- thanks for all the input. I guess I wasn't taking the actual "pushing" phase into consideration, since I didn't go through that last time.
One of my absurd concerns (with a breech) is dilating and having a foot prolapse! It's not totally absurd though-- the day before my water broke with #1 I was 2 cm dilated and my doctor said he felt baby's foot. Completely freaked me out! |
Anonymous
| 10:31 here. Good point about the pushing phase. Part of what made my subsequent vaginal birth faster was a way shorter pushing time. For baby #2, I was told to stop pushing at one point but baby came out anyway. It was so speedy compared to the three hours pushing out baby #1! |
Anonymous
|
1st preg: lasted 5 hours (but I was also 5cm dilated when admitted to the hospital)
2nd preg: almost had the baby on the Fairfax Co. Parkway!...had the baby within 20 min. of arriving at the hospital |
Anonymous
|
First child labor was about 18 hours, including about 2 hours of pushing.
Second was about 36 hours of labor but just 20 minutes of pushing. |
Anonymous
| First - active labor of 8 hrs, 1 hr of pushing before she was delivered with vacuum. Second - 6 hrs active labor & 5 mins of pushing. |
Anonymous
|
Hi,
If your doctor is concerned about your going into labor/delivering vaginally, he/she should probably schedule a c-section early, to make sure that doesn't happen. You should definitely discuss this. I had fast labor for the first - about 3 hours from beginning to end. I'm afraid this next one will be faster too. My mother also had fast ones - usually gave birth a few minutes after arriving at the hospital. My last doctor scheduled an inducement for that reason, didn't want me to deliver while stuck on the beltway. |
Anonymous
| 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. |
Anonymous
| With both of mine we went to the hospital at 2 am, and didn't have 1st baby until 7 pm, second at 8 pm. |