A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » misc.kids » Pregnancy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

length of labour



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 9th 04, 11:33 PM
Zoe Brown
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default length of labour

All

Hello, I am currently 26 weeks pregnant.

I have a 13 year old daughter who was born a few weeks early and only after
a 2 hour delivery. I was 16 at the time of her birth. I know that we don't
know the actual answer to these things but given that this is my second
pregnancy and is 14 years later is it likely that this delivery will be
quicker that two hours ???

I am hoping...

Zoe


  #2  
Old December 10th 04, 01:21 AM
Larry McMahan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Zoe Brown writes:
: All

: Hello, I am currently 26 weeks pregnant.

: I have a 13 year old daughter who was born a few weeks early and only after
: a 2 hour delivery. I was 16 at the time of her birth. I know that we don't
: know the actual answer to these things but given that this is my second
: pregnancy and is 14 years later is it likely that this delivery will be
: quicker that two hours ???

: I am hoping...

: Zoe


Hmmm. Two hours is awfully short for a labor. Are yuo just counting from
the time you got to the hospital, the pushing stage, or what?

Larry
  #3  
Old December 10th 04, 05:17 AM
Ericka Kammerer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Zoe Brown wrote:

All

Hello, I am currently 26 weeks pregnant.

I have a 13 year old daughter who was born a few weeks early and only after
a 2 hour delivery. I was 16 at the time of her birth. I know that we don't
know the actual answer to these things but given that this is my second
pregnancy and is 14 years later is it likely that this delivery will be
quicker that two hours ???


Sorry, I really don't think there's any way to know
for sure. My second labor was just over two hours, but my
third (six years later) was five hours (and my first was
45 hours).

Best wishes,
Ericka

  #4  
Old December 10th 04, 07:43 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I think usually the second labor is shorter, but no guarantees, and 2
hours would be hard to beat. My first labor was 6 hours after my water
broke, and my second labor was 2.5 hours after my water broke. I
wasn't having much action before the water broke in both cases.

KC

  #5  
Old December 10th 04, 10:52 AM
Anne Rogers
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Hmmm. Two hours is awfully short for a labor. Are yuo just counting from
the time you got to the hospital, the pushing stage, or what?


doesn't that rather depend on how you measure when labour starts, if you
measure it from the first painful contraction, then I was in labour 11
weeks, if you measure it in terms of dilation, my labour was apparently 1.5
hours, there is such a thing a precipitate labour, I at least had some
warning I was at the hopsital being induced, but no one expected a baby that
day, I was 5cm dilated 20 minutes before delivery and that truely freaked me
out. My mum had two true precipitate labours, one induced in under 2 hours
one spontaneous at 38 weeks also in under 2 hours. So short labours DO
happen but they aren't necessarily a good thing, the shock for me was
possibly the biggest shock I'd ever experienced and I suffered flash backs
for months afterwards.


  #6  
Old December 10th 04, 10:58 AM
Anne Rogers
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Sorry, I really don't think there's any way to know
for sure. My second labor was just over two hours, but my
third (six years later) was five hours (and my first was
45 hours).


I'd settle for 5 over 2 any day, just a little bit more time to make sure
everything is ready to go, like the midwife is actually there, rather than
still on her way!

to the original poster, there isn't much way to tell, and you don't say how
early and how small your baby was, which could make a difference, plus with
early labours first time mums often don't notice the early signs which you
probably would this time, it would be very unlikely for you to suddenly have
a very long labour, unless the baby was malpostioned, or something else. I
would have thought that whilst active labour could be less than two hours
you are likely to have some warning (my mum for example had a show 8 hrs or
so before my sister was born, though active labour was around an hour).

cheers

Anne


  #7  
Old December 10th 04, 12:22 PM
Zoe Brown
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Larry McMahan" wrote in message
...
Zoe Brown writes:
: All

: Hello, I am currently 26 weeks pregnant.

: I have a 13 year old daughter who was born a few weeks early and only

after
: a 2 hour delivery. I was 16 at the time of her birth. I know that we

don't
: know the actual answer to these things but given that this is my second
: pregnancy and is 14 years later is it likely that this delivery will be
: quicker that two hours ???

: I am hoping...

: Zoe


Hmmm. Two hours is awfully short for a labor. Are yuo just counting from
the time you got to the hospital, the pushing stage, or what?


Well it was a long time ago. She was 5 weeks early too. I had bad backache
for a few day's before but nothing too bad. My waters broke at 9pm on 7th
March 1991 and she was born at 11:10pm on 7th March.

My waters broke, I started regular contractions. The midwife said to come
in the morning but my mum took me in anyway. By the time I got to the
hospital at about 9:45 I was told that I was fully dilated and taken to the
delivery room. No time for medication - apart from gas and air...

Larry



  #8  
Old December 10th 04, 12:26 PM
Zoe Brown
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Anne Rogers" wrote in message
...

Sorry, I really don't think there's any way to know
for sure. My second labor was just over two hours, but my
third (six years later) was five hours (and my first was
45 hours).


I'd settle for 5 over 2 any day, just a little bit more time to make sure
everything is ready to go, like the midwife is actually there, rather than
still on her way!

to the original poster, there isn't much way to tell, and you don't say

how
early and how small your baby was, which could make a difference, plus

with
early labours first time mums often don't notice the early signs which you
probably would this time, it would be very unlikely for you to suddenly

have
a very long labour, unless the baby was malpostioned, or something else. I
would have thought that whilst active labour could be less than two hours
you are likely to have some warning (my mum for example had a show 8 hrs

or
so before my sister was born, though active labour was around an hour).


You are correct, perhaps I missed some signs. I may have missed the loss of
the mucus plug, and I did have back ache. In any case Naomi was 7lbs and
apparently 5 weeks early, but I didn't know my dates and she was dated by
the first scan which was not until about 26weeks.



cheers

Anne




  #9  
Old December 10th 04, 01:06 PM
Zoe Brown
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Hmmm. Two hours is awfully short for a labor. Are yuo just counting from
the time you got to the hospital, the pushing stage, or what?


Well it was a long time ago. She was 5 weeks early too. I had bad backache
for a few day's before but nothing too bad. My waters broke at 9pm on 7th
March 1991 and she was born at 11:10pm on 7th March.

My waters broke, I started regular contractions. The midwife said to come
in the morning but my mum took me in anyway. By the time I got to the
hospital at about 9:45 I was told that I was fully dilated and taken to the
delivery room. No time for medication - apart from gas and air...


  #10  
Old December 10th 04, 03:17 PM
Anne Rogers
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

You are correct, perhaps I missed some signs. I may have missed the loss
of
the mucus plug, and I did have back ache. In any case Naomi was 7lbs and
apparently 5 weeks early, but I didn't know my dates and she was dated by
the first scan which was not until about 26weeks.


dating is very inaccurate at 26 weeks, I suspect she was early, but maybe 2
or 3 weeks not 5


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
long labour (36 hours) - advice needed Abi Pregnancy 14 July 15th 04 02:38 PM
Birth story: very late and *extremely* long Sidheag McCormack Pregnancy 14 December 13th 03 09:37 PM
Anna's birth story (long) Welches Pregnancy 7 October 29th 03 01:52 AM
Checking BP/preeclampsia signs in labour Sidheag McCormack Pregnancy 11 October 15th 03 10:25 AM
Midwives & Home birth vs. an OB & hospital ? LSU Grad of '89 Pregnancy 54 October 12th 03 09:26 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:40 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.