Re: 'To induce or not to induce' that is the question

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: april: "Re: Paxil withdrawl in newborn"
• Previous message: anonymous@obgyn.net: "Re: No EWCM"
• In reply to: Sean: "'To induce or not to induce' that is the question"
• Next in thread: anonymous: "Re: 'To induce or not to induce' that is the question *update*"
• Reply: anonymous: "Re: 'To induce or not to induce' that is the question *update*"

I've been induced twice, and both were non-complicated vaginal deliveries. A lot depends on how ready your cervix is. However, if the baby is big and won't fit through the birth canal, it isn't going to matter if you induce or not. This will become apparent (if this is the case) during the labor when the head doesn't decend and the cervix does not completely dilate.

>
>2) I'm somewhat disappointed at our doctor not not being able to
>recommend. Just curious of any opinion on what we should do?

Most doctors, at this point, are willing to let the patient decide. There is no strong medical evidence that induction before 42 weeks is necessary. So taking a wait and see approach is fine. You should be having extra testing now, though, to make sure the placenta is functioning okay to support the baby and there is no fetal distress. This is a very non-invansive test called a non-stress test. Most doctors will start this at 41 weeks, twice weekly, until the baby is delivered.

Good luck!

• Next message: april: "Re: Paxil withdrawl in newborn"
• Previous message: anonymous@obgyn.net: "Re: No EWCM"
• In reply to: Sean: "'To induce or not to induce' that is the question"
• Next in thread: anonymous: "Re: 'To induce or not to induce' that is the question *update*"
• Reply: anonymous: "Re: 'To induce or not to induce' that is the question *update*"