so.. not in early labour after all then!!!!!!!!!!

Aug 15, 2006 16:49

AAAAARRRRRRRRGGGGGGGHHHHHHH ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

donut_fiend August 18 2006, 06:40:55 UTC
So yeah - she says that she has only very rarely come accross first babies who are anything other than late... I told her about the poll I had done that showed as many had come early as late, but she just shrugged it off and said 'not in this area'.

If I think about the people I've known who've given birth in the last couple of years, let's see... Four of them had their first baby approximately one week late, and two of us had our babies three weeks early, which would still, on average, make the first baby early. (And, not that it was any time recent, but my mother's first baby was a week early, so maybe there's something genetic involved?) But then, given the number of women who have babies, a great many samples are going to have disproportionately early births while the overall average still remains a little late, I'd imagine. Really, it's probably a total crapshoot and you could be one of those who's three weeks early or two weeks late, and you won't know until the day your baby decides to pop out! :-o Babies don't seem to be much for making consistent plans ;)

Yikes, I hope you can get your baby to return to the proper position! No one wants a bunch of back labour! Although I've heard some babies don't get themselves in the posterior position until right before popping out anyway, but still, nice to know they're in the right position before the big day. Other than that, I'm glad to hear everything is going well, other than the confused midwife. Seriously, isn't labour her area of expertise???

Come on out of there already, baby! Prove those stats wrong ;)

Reply


Leave a comment

Up