Posted by My OB said WHAT?!?.
Dec
20
Posted by My OB said WHAT?!?.
“…We Will Be Scheduling You For An Induction Of The Twins No Later Than 38 Weeks…”
“If you have not gone into labor on your own before 37 weeks, we will be scheduling you for an induction of the twins no later than 38 weeks, they will need to come out by then.” - OB to mother at her 12 week twin prenatal.
There are 26 comments to this post.
Ignoring the stupidity of inducing so early with no medical need (no, twins are not a medical need); I think that the fact that “induction” is what the OB said, rather than “cesarean” is a big step forward.
OP, I would love to know how it went, if you left, etc.!
[Reply]
Kate, Ren's mama Reply:
December 20th, 2011 at 2:48 pm (Quote)
Yeah, this. I think it’s pretty rare to find a hospital willing to “let” a mom try for a vaginal twin birth, so this actually doesn’t bug me as much as it might. And at least they aren’t pushing for an induction at 37 weeks…
[Reply]
Jennifer at Organic Baby University had this to say,
Dec 20, 2011 @ 2:14 pm (Quote)
And scheduling an induction?? Most doctors won’t allow vaginal labor due to risks (of course mostly ridiculous) but to AUTOMATICALLY INDUCE?? And increase the risks? Whaaaa??
[Reply]
J_holmes88 had this to say,
Dec 20, 2011 @ 2:26 pm (Quote)
I’m currently 22 1/2 weeks pregnant with twin girls and if they try to set an induction date, before 44 weeks or something crazy like that, I’ll laugh and make sure they know I will NOT be showing up.
[Reply]
I don’t get the point of inducing. Just because they’re twins doesn’t mean they won’t know when to come. Is this for the comfort of the mother, because that is not a good reason to induce. Plenty of women pregnant with multiples start to labor naturally if given the chance.
[Reply]
I’m 25 weeks with twin boys and my ob is not even thinking about inductions, or even c-sections for that matter. I’m going to go into labor naturally and try my hardest to have these 2 little boys as naturally as possible. My doctor is even willing to deliver the second twin breech if that’s how he is hanging out.
[Reply]
Had a friend who, after being told to expect her twins early, carried to 41 weeks. And they were perfectly fine, thank you. As long as the twins show no signs of distress or retarded growth, why shouldn’t they stay in until THEY are ready?
[Reply]
My mother-in-law is visiting. She had twins, naturally, in 1983. I mentioned something about how for a lot of OBs now, twins are basically an automatic c-section. She said, “Are you kidding me?! Birthing my two 5lb twins was WAY easier than birthing my one 9lb daughter! No way would I have had a c-section unless I needed one!”
[Reply]
JessicaKC Reply:
December 21st, 2011 at 6:22 am (Quote)
You know, I was born in 85, my brother in 90, and my mom says she is shocked by the difference in care between then and now. She said the OB group she went to encourged being unmedicated and labor starting naturally etc etc. They don’t anymore. What happened?
[Reply]
Natalie St.John had this to say,
Dec 20, 2011 @ 7:26 pm (Quote)
I was also surprised the doctor said induction rather than c-section, but I have to wonder if it’s just a bait and switch.
[Reply]
Knitted in the Womb had this to say,
Dec 20, 2011 @ 7:38 pm (Quote)
Unfortunately “standard of care” right now is for induction at thirtySEVEN weeks for twins, so this woman has been given a slight reprieve. Of my clients who have had twins, only one was able to go past 37 weeks, and she had to argue strongly for it…then she ended up agreeing to an induction at 37 weeks 5 days because of extreme discomfort (she had a separation of her pubic bone that had resulted in her not being able to drive for about 3 months–her babies were both around 8 lbs at birth, not surprising since her first baby was 9 lbs 11 oz).
But there really isn’t a lot of good research supporting the ideal gestational length for twins. There are some very small studies that show no difference in outcomes for those induced at 37 weeks vs. those managed expectantly…if there is “no change” in outcomes, most OB’s tend to lean toward early eviction because the sooner they get the babies out, the sooner their liability ends. There is a proposed study in Australia that will involve several hundred twin pregnancies that will hopefully provide more powerful evidence about ideal gestational length.
[Reply]
Details Reply:
December 21st, 2011 at 4:49 am (Quote)
Even when they come up with an “ideal” gestantional length they won’t have answered ANY questions until they determine the outlying limits of healthy. One point in the middle will do nothing for us. Limits such as not before 34-35-36-37 and not after 42-43-44 would be useful due to natural variation.
I think docotrs just like to induce for their own comfort and scheduling issues.
[Reply]
Knitted in the Womb Reply:
December 21st, 2011 at 9:09 am (Quote)
I agree that having one “ideal” gestational age is not the best option, but I would take your suggestion one step further and say that it would be helpful to have data on what the risks of induction are (X% cesarean, X% perineal tears, X% of babies in NICU…blah, blah, blah) at various gestations vs. the percent of those same outcomes in women who are not induced at that point. Then let the women weight the pros and cons…because while one negative outcome may be lowered by induction (or expectant management), another outcome my be increased…and it really should be up to the mother to decide which one it is more important for her to avoid.
[Reply]
My friend is pregnant with twins and was told the exact same thing. I don’t understand the need for blanket treatment, rather than treating each pregnancy different. If there is some medical need to induce at 38 weeks, fine. But if everything looks good, why not just leave well enough alone?
[Reply]
My OB says the same thing, and told me this at my 10 week prenatal visit, my first visit. I am 32 weeks right now. They are open to a vaginal delivery as both are head down (though I would have been fine with breech deliveries as well), but they keep stating if I make it to 38 weeks that’s as far as they’ll let me go. Apparently they are not prepared for how stubborn I can and will be. I’m willing to go all the way to the end and beyond if it means to healthy happy babies.
[Reply]
Lisa Reply:
December 23rd, 2011 at 12:13 pm (Quote)
Honestly, what can they do to you if don’t agree to a c-section? The worst is they can fire you as a patient, but you can still use whatever doctor is on call at the hospital. Of course, that would also be a good lawsuit on your part if he denied you care, seeing as how twins are ‘technically’ high risk. So they can schedule c-sections as many times as they like, just remind them that you will not be there for them.
[Reply]
This was one of my first prenatal visits at the local base hospital. They spewed a LOT of crap from their mouths and it was shortly after this visit I RAN to find someone else. Home birth was on my mind since my previous birth was at home but there were two obstacles 1) Colorado law prohibits planned twin home births and 2)this was a surrogacy situation and the parents were not ok with HB.
[Reply]
Add Your Comment.
Wait. Seriously– I don’t understand the medical reasoning for this. I think I have even asked it before: Twins are more likely to be smaller… why not let them stay in there as long as possible? I don’t even get the “sounds sorts logical but isn’t” reason for this.
[Reply]