Sugar is fine, but now he might be breech

[sher]

I had another appointment yesterday and the good news is that after
watching my sugar for a week, my urine looked good. He still wants me
to take it easy on the sweets, but since I've gained 3 pounds in a
week without them, I should probably do that anyway.

Now, the bad news. Before my appointment, I had been working at home
so I could put up my swollen feet. As I've mentioned before, the baby
has always reacted a lot to having my laptop anywhere near him. He
was moving quite a bit, so I put away my work, but apparently too
late. When I got to my appointment and my doctor started to feel the
baby's position, he said the baby had moved into a transverse
position. This morning, he is no longer transverse, but I'm pretty
sure he is breech. The hard lump under my ribs feels very different
from the bum I had been feeling for the past 3 weeks. I'll be 37
weeks tomorrow, so the doctor wants to see what the baby does over the
weekend and have me come back in on Monday where we'll discuss doing a
version if necessary. I'm really freaked out about the possibility of
having a c-section and I don't think I am up to attempting a breech
birth vaginally. I asked my doctor if there was anything I could do
to encourage him to turn around and he said not really. But I know
many of you have tried things that have worked, so I'm all ears. I
really want him to turn by himself before Monday. I'm starting to
think of all that could go wrong and most of my thoughts are probably
irrational, but last night I dreamed he turned around so much that he
got tangled in the cord. My doctor tried to be very reassuring and
told me that since this is my third birth, my body obviously knows how
to do this and I shouldn't worry too much. Then I think about Ericka
having to have a version for her 3rd baby and I get worried. Any
encouraging thoughts would be much appreciated.

~ Sher, due with boy #3 9/27/03

[Larry McMahan]

See my article on how to turn a breech baby with yoga:
http://home.comcast.net/~l.mcmahan/turn.html

Larry

sher > writes:
: I had another appointment yesterday and the good news is that after
: watching my sugar for a week, my urine looked good. He still wants me
: to take it easy on the sweets, but since I've gained 3 pounds in a
: week without them, I should probably do that anyway.

: Now, the bad news. Before my appointment, I had been working at home
: so I could put up my swollen feet. As I've mentioned before, the baby
: has always reacted a lot to having my laptop anywhere near him. He
: was moving quite a bit, so I put away my work, but apparently too
: late. When I got to my appointment and my doctor started to feel the
: baby's position, he said the baby had moved into a transverse
: position. This morning, he is no longer transverse, but I'm pretty
: sure he is breech. The hard lump under my ribs feels very different
: from the bum I had been feeling for the past 3 weeks. I'll be 37
: weeks tomorrow, so the doctor wants to see what the baby does over the
: weekend and have me come back in on Monday where we'll discuss doing a
: version if necessary. I'm really freaked out about the possibility of
: having a c-section and I don't think I am up to attempting a breech
: birth vaginally. I asked my doctor if there was anything I could do
: to encourage him to turn around and he said not really. But I know
: many of you have tried things that have worked, so I'm all ears. I
: really want him to turn by himself before Monday. I'm starting to
: think of all that could go wrong and most of my thoughts are probably
: irrational, but last night I dreamed he turned around so much that he
: got tangled in the cord. My doctor tried to be very reassuring and
: told me that since this is my third birth, my body obviously knows how
: to do this and I shouldn't worry too much. Then I think about Ericka
: having to have a version for her 3rd baby and I get worried. Any
: encouraging thoughts would be much appreciated.

: ~ Sher, due with boy #3 9/27/03

[Ericka Kammerer]

sher wrote:


> I asked my doctor if there was anything I could do
> to encourage him to turn around and he said not really.


What?! There's no guarantee it'll work, of course, but
check out: http://www.gentlebirth.org/archives/breech.html
Didn't work for me, but I know many people for whom techniques
like these have worked quite well.


> My doctor tried to be very reassuring and
> told me that since this is my third birth, my body obviously knows how
> to do this and I shouldn't worry too much. Then I think about Ericka
> having to have a version for her 3rd baby and I get worried.


Ahh, but the good news is that my version was quick,
easy, painless, and SUCCESSFUL ;-)

Wishing you the best of luck,
Ericka

[annafine]

Ericka,

What is involved in a version?

Do you know if many insurance plans cover it?

Thanks!
Anna

EDD #1 October 18, 2003--at 34 week appointment baby was
breech...Doctor said she'd likely plan for a c-section if baby is
still breech in 2 weeks when I go back.

[Ericka Kammerer]

annafine wrote:

> Ericka,
>
> What is involved in a version?


Depends on the practitioner. In my case, my midwives
referred me to a very flexible OB who was willing to go the
lowest intervention route available depending on my situation.
I had to go to the hospital, was monitored for a bit, and had
an ultrasound to look at the precise position of the baby
relative to the placenta and the cord and so forth so the
doctor could plan how he was going to turn the baby. Then,
they dumped a ton of gel over my belly and then mineral oil
over that and the doctor and the resident (who was helping
and learning) put their hands on my belly and turned the
baby in one smooth movement (took less than 30 seconds).
They held the baby there for a moment, then did another
quickie u/s to make sure the baby was well situated. Then
I was monitored for another 20 minutes or so to make sure
the baby had tolerated the procedure well and sent home.
It was not painful, though there was some pressure.
From what I understand, that's about as low
intervention and about as easy as versions get. They
can be more challenging, and possibly more painful,
depending on the doctor's technique and the position
of the baby. In some situations, it can be inadvisable
to do a version.
Many practitioners will start an IV (just in case),
and some will also administer tocolytic drugs through the
IV in order to relax your uterus. Some choose an epidural
for pain relief during the procedure. Some prefer to induce
immediately following a successful version so that the
baby doesn't have any chance of turning back. Some of those
interventions may be advisable in some situations, but
needn't be used routinely, so find a practitioner who is
willing to work with you and be flexible about procedures
depending on your particular situation.
Also, don't be shy about going to a different doctor
to have the version done. You want the most experienced person
you can find to do the version. Some doctors don't do them
at all, and some only reluctantly. You want someone who's
done a lot of them and is very experienced. It's not that
it's a terribly dangerous or difficult procedure, but
experience makes a difference. The guy who did mine has
quite a reputation for being able to turn babies that other
doctors have failed to turn. I also think it wasn't a
coincidence that I had the best luck getting the doctor
who had the most experience with versions to be willing
to go with the lowest intervention route possible.
In general, versions are most successful when
done sometime in the 37th week. After that, the success
rate goes down. Before 37 weeks the rate of babies
turning back to breech goes up. If the version fails,
you can try again (unless something about the new position
precludes doing so). The most common risk (though it doesn't
happen very often) is that the version will throw you into
labor. That's another reason that they like to do them
at 37 weeks or later, so that if it does induce labor the
baby is full term. In very rare cases it can cause a
placental abruption. This risk can be reduced by checking
things carefully ahead of time to make sure the position
of the baby relative to cord and placenta is favorable.
There's also some discretion involved in how hard to push
things. The more force required to move the baby, the
higher the risk of complications (and the more it's likely
to hurt). When I talked to the doctor who did mine, I
said that I wanted to go without the IV, tocolytic drugs,
epidural and so forth--but that if the version was very
difficult (making some of those things more desirable),
I'd rather back off and re-evaluate. Fortunately, that
wasn't necessary.


> Do you know if many insurance plans cover it?


Mine did, and I believe most would.


> EDD #1 October 18, 2003--at 34 week appointment baby was
> breech...Doctor said she'd likely plan for a c-section if baby is
> still breech in 2 weeks when I go back.


That's crazy, unless there's something abnormal
you haven't mentioned! The preferred time for a version
is in the 37th week, and her plan would have you going for
a c-section before you even had a chance to give version
your best shot!

Good luck,
Ericka

[Daye]

On 6 Sep 2003 21:11:54 -0700, (annafine) wrote:

>EDD #1 October 18, 2003--at 34 week appointment baby was
>breech...Doctor said she'd likely plan for a c-section if baby is
>still breech in 2 weeks when I go back.

Even at my hospital and I had a c-section with my DD, they would like
to do my c-section (if I choose that) at 38 weeks. Why do they want
to do one before then? Or am I reading this wrong?

--
Daye
Momma to Jayan
"Boy" EDD 11 Jan 2004
See Jayan: http://jayan.topcities.com/

[annafine]

Daye > wrote in message >...
> On 09 Sep 2003 00:12:32 GMT, (H Schinske) wrote:
>
> >I had to read it twice, but I think she meant they would make the DECISION at
> >36 weeks, not do the section then.
>
> I hope so! I was also hoping that I was reading it wrong. I know
> that there are reasons to have a c-section at 36 weeks, but from her
> original post, I couldn't see a reason to do it at 36 weeks.

NO c-section at 36 weeks...Sorry about confusing everyone. The OB was
just meaning that we'd start planning for it at that time, but we'd do
it later.

I'm actually going to ask her to wait another week or a little more
before we actually take that step.

Then I think I'm likely to ask her about turning the baby before
planning for a c-section. I'd really rather not have a major surgery
(and c-sections are)...but if it is necessary, I am prepared for that
too.

Anna

[CandyC]

My DS decided to turn 3 days before labor (footling breech). So I had to
have a C. Last Gyn appt. 4 days before showed head down, then next day I
noticed i was uncomfortable. My fault for not bringing it to docs
attention, but he surely turned and they can turn anytime if they want, LOL.
Perhaps they can do a version for you. but my case, maybe not, cord was
around neck (high probability with rare footling breech).

"annafine" > wrote in message
m...
> Daye > wrote in message
>...
> > On 6 Sep 2003 21:11:54 -0700, (annafine) wrote:
> >
> > >EDD #1 October 18, 2003--at 34 week appointment baby was
> > >breech...Doctor said she'd likely plan for a c-section if baby is
> > >still breech in 2 weeks when I go back.
> >
> > Even at my hospital and I had a c-section with my DD, they would like
> > to do my c-section (if I choose that) at 38 weeks. Why do they want
> > to do one before then? Or am I reading this wrong?
>
> I think you're reading it wrong...or maybe I worded it a little
> confusing.
>
> The OB said she'd plan for a c-section at 36 weeks if the baby was
> still breech but she didn't say she'd do it at that time. I guess she
> was figuring that if the baby was still breech at 36 weeks that it was
> likely that baby would not turn within the last 4 weeks (and I've read
> that they normally turn between 32 and 36 weeks, so this sorta makes a
> little sense).

[annafine]

> My DS decided to turn 3 days before labor (footling breech). So I had to
> have a C. Last Gyn appt. 4 days before showed head down, then next day I
> noticed i was uncomfortable. My fault for not bringing it to docs
> attention, but he surely turned and they can turn anytime if they want, LOL.
> Perhaps they can do a version for you. but my case, maybe not, cord was
> around neck (high probability with rare footling breech).


I think at this point (nearly 35 weeks) I have a footling breech
because I feel little 'kicks' very low at times...very odd feeling I
must say.

I still feel the hard bump up high on my belly (which my OB said was
the baby's head). When the baby is moving her head, I tell my husband
at times that "she's banging the walls trying to get out". When I
tell him that she's moving all over the place, his comment is "maybe
she's trying to turn around, but she's stuck".

Is it possible for the baby to get "stuck" in a footling breech
position so that they are actually NOT able to turn?

I haven't mentioned to my OB that I feel little kicks very low
yet...but I will at my next appointment (the 17th).

Anna

[Ericka Kammerer]

annafine wrote:


> I think at this point (nearly 35 weeks) I have a footling breech
> because I feel little 'kicks' very low at times...very odd feeling I
> must say.


You can feel those low kicks even with a frank breech.


> I still feel the hard bump up high on my belly (which my OB said was
> the baby's head). When the baby is moving her head, I tell my husband
> at times that "she's banging the walls trying to get out". When I
> tell him that she's moving all over the place, his comment is "maybe
> she's trying to turn around, but she's stuck".
>
> Is it possible for the baby to get "stuck" in a footling breech
> position so that they are actually NOT able to turn?

I don't know if it gets *impossible* for them to
turn, but some babies choose not to turn. It is also
possible for the geometry of the situation to be such
that turning the baby via external version looks
inadvisable. But just because the baby doesn't turn
on his or her own doesn't mean that it's impossible
or inadvisable to turn the baby.

Best wishes,
Ericka