I am editing this old post to ask a new question. Well, the question is, if my wife does really require a c-section ultimately, can we NOT plan a section and instead wait for some signals from my wife's body, which would signal that babies are about to come out and then act upon them? We just don't want to risk premature babies. I suppose we will still have enough time without getting into an emergency delivery...I mean a few hours at least? (I am asking this because some family members are telling us that it may be too late, so we should plan it and docs are also giving mixed information.) Thank you. This is a second “Pregnant with twins” thread corollary to the previously opened thread some months ago. To refresh your memories, dear forum members, my wife is pregnant with twins, is due in late September-early October and is considereing a planned C-section. My wife has this--sometimes misguided--belief that C-section will be much easer; as if you are having your babies in two minutes plus it’s painless, compared with protracted vaginal birth. She thinks it’s harder on the mother but will be safer for the babies. But at the same time we known C-section is a surgical operation and hence unnatural relative to vaginal birth which is only natural. It is because she is carrying twins that she is considering planned C-section; she thinks it’s going to be safer and yet this is a controversial opinion not supported by facts and medical practice as outlined in the info set below. So I am opening this topic to collect more opinions for contemplation while there is still time. Please advise us, how would you feel in our situation?! Thanks for your support! *** A cesarean section poses documented medical risks to the mother's health, including infections, hemorrhage, transfusion, injury to other organs, anesthesia complications, psychological complications, and a maternal mortality two to four times greater than that for a vaginal birth.. Even a routine, scheduled cesarean section with no medical complication as the reason for the surgery carries a two times greater risk that the woman will die from the surgery. Because all the water is not squeezed out of the baby's lungs as is normally done during a vaginal birth, more babies born after cesarean section develop serious respiratory distress syndrome Even mature babies, the absences of labor increases the risk of breathing problems and other complications. Laboring also helps to tone the uterus, making it easier for it to stretch back to pre-pregnancy size too often a cesarean section is done too soon, resulting in a premature birth. accidentally nicked the woman's aorta, the biggest artery in the body, leading to internal hemorrhage, shock and death A woman with a vaginal birth is more likely to leak urine (urinary incontinence) and to leak gas. BUT-The research does not support this claim. episiotomy, a surgical cut made just before birth to widen the opening of the vagina) can contribute to incontinence in the period after the birth. While research supports avoiding whenever possible maternity practices that can harm the pelvic floor, it does not support avoiding vaginal birth itself. woman with a cesarean appears to be more likely than a woman with vaginal birth to have blood clots, including clots blocking blood vessels in the lungs (pulmonary embolism) and blocking blood flow to the brain (stroke). most women with a cesarean use pain medication after birth and consider pain at the cesarean wound to be a problem. A cesarean costs nearly twice as much as a vaginal birth…professional medical journals have ads for purchasing private jets… Up to 77% of women for whom the indication for cesarean delivery was a non- progressive labor..pre-eclampsia, hemorraghia, RDS, oxygen supply etc. SOME ADVANTAGES Taking a long time to get to the point when your cervix is open (dilated) to 4 centimeters or so says nothing about your ability to birth your baby vaginally. Slow or stalled labors after that (in active labor) are more concerning, but even in these cases, most women can have vaginal births A planned cesarean offers some advantages over an unplanned cesarean (a cesarean that occurs after labor is under way). For example, there may be fewer surgical injuries and fewer infections. The emotional impact of a cesarean that is planned in advance appears to be similar to or somewhat worse than a vaginal birth. By contrast, unplanned cesareans can take a greater emotional toll. Nearly all babies will take up a head-first position by the end of pregnancy. When the baby is in a buttocks- or feet-first (breech) position, labor poses some increased risks for both mother and baby..Should your baby continue in the breech position, most caregivers will recommend a cesarean. There are important advantages to cesarean in this situation in comparison with typical hospital ways of handling vaginal breech births: Sometimes they can guide the baby's head into the pelvis by pressing on your abdomen after the first baby is born--called external cephalic version. Others will reach up into the uterus, find the baby's feet, and deliver the second baby by breech extraction after the first one is born. Still others, like your doctor, prefer cesarean for any twins that aren't both headfirst. having both a vaginal birth and a cesarean is not a good solution to the problem. Most caregivers will recommend a cesarean when there are three or more babies. (but not Two): no well-done research currently supports routine delivery of twins by cesarean section. Twins who are born naturally may be more at risk of dying, than those delivered by Caesarean, the results of a new study indicate: Researchers studied the births of over 4,500 sets of twins between 1992 and 1997. The Scottish researchers conclude that women pregnant with twins should be advised of the possible 'protective effect' of Caesarean sections when giving birth… The results of this study can be found in the 'British Medical Journal'. well if it’s a well done study who knows… TO SUM IT UP Cesarean is major surgery, and the recovery is much more difficult than recovering from vaginal birth. Most of my patients who have had both a cesarean and a vaginal birth would choose vaginal. On the other hand, a cesarean after a long labor is a lot worse than a scheduled cesarean, and many women who have an elective repeat cesarean find that they are not as wiped out if they don't have to labor first. I have had patients who were satisfied with the decision to try for VBAC even though they ended up having a cesarean, because they felt that at least we tried. I also have had patients who were relieved to just schedule a repeat cesarean so that they didn't have the anxiety of not knowing what would happen. Cesarean birth can be life saving for both mothers and unborn babies in a small proportion of situations, but for most women and babies at the end of pregnancy, the overall risks of surgical birth outweigh benefits.
Everything has its pros and cons....To think that a C-Section is the easy way out is not always the case. Yes it seems to be "nice" and "no labor"..... I had my twins 3 1/2 weeks early, the firat baby(A) was breech, and depended on her to flop. As it came on the morning when my water broke...at 7:05 am, my contractions started immediately. I went to the hospital by 8:00. They let me labor for a good 1 1/2 hours, and said she has flipped(via ultrasound)... Turns out she had never flipped. So i had a C-section. I was prepared for it mentally anyhow. So by 11:05 amd 11:06 they arrived. It all took place so quickly~ I won't lie the C-section was painful...would I do it again??..Yes! I didn't think I'd every walk again. They make you get up and walk just hours after....not so much fun. But the next day was a little better. And by two days after I was walking down the hallway! To have twins vaginally is wonderful i am sure, but your wife has a very good chance to go early, and they may make her labor despire the scheduled C-section. i just didn't want myself to labor vagianlly for one and c-section the other (which does happen). All I say is Ouch twice and in two places. All I can say is to not stress about how the babies will arrive. As long as wife and babies are fine and all healthy! That is all that really matters. And if you already have it scheduled and can make it that far!! that is great! And just a little inside tip....for both of you....enjoy what you have of sleep now, because you will not get any for a long time!!! Good Luck!
One of my best friends recently had twins via c-section. It was planned, but not for her ease. One of the babies wasn't gaining weight... it had to do with the placenta not "pumping" continuously, but only when the mother's heart beat. The doctors took the babies a month early to save the little one. They are both healthy and happy now. As for the c-section.. she said it wasn't that bad, but she does regret that she couldn't have had a "normal" birth. She is very interested in what is going on with me right now, as she has never experianced it. Don't know if that helped you at all... sorry.
I'd suggest you try to convince your wife to have them naturally. Pain is just part of the deal. She may regret not having them naturally later....she may feel she's missed out. C-sections DO hurt. According to the women I know who've had them. She's due around the same time as me.
i'm a mom of three, but i don't have twins, and i've never had a c-section, so take my opinions as you will. If it was me, i would not plan a c-section, for many reasons. First of all, if one is needed for life-saving purposes, it can generally be done pretty quickly. i wouldn't worry at all about that. If it came to that, chances are that having labored won't make the situation any worse, and may actually help strengthen the baby in preparation for life outside the womb (afterall, labor has it's purposes). Another important thing to consider is BONDING. Bonding doesn't necessarily *have* to happen immediately after birth to be affective, but it certainly doesn't hurt. Vaginal birthing mothers have an easier time breastfeeding, because it can be done immediately, and there's no incision to consider, and there are fewer cases of PPD. C-Section moms often don't see their babies at all for a couple of hours while they recover, and the baby gets poked and prodded by strangers instead of loved and comforted by the only people they recognize Recovery is huge. i can't imagine how much work TWO newborns can be, especially if mom is also recovering from surgery, having a hard time breastfeeding AND depressed. Not that any or all of that will happen to your woman, or that vaginal birth will prevent them, but the odds seem to be higher with surgery thrown into the mix. My advice to you is to simply be prepared for any kind of birth, and try to stay flexible when it happens. This is the same advice i'd give anyone, for multiples or single babies.
I had a natural vaginal birth and an emergency c-section. Let me tell you, the c-section was a million times worse. Sure, the pain from delivery was gone, but in its place was weeks of severe pain at the incision. Getting up and sitting down were excruciating. I thought my abdomen was going to burst. I couldn't do anything. I wasn't allowed to pick up my baby for several weeks. She had to be brought to me. I needed help lowering myself onto the toilet. Definitely encourage her to NOT plan a c-section. They are wonderful for emergency (both Virginia and I would have died otherwise) but not as standard practice....
What a beautiful set of babies, Critter Thank you guys! Critter1223 This shows there is no sure way of knowing, until labor. :yes: :yes: Thank you!, icedteapriestess. moon_flower, thaanks! RyvreWillow :yes: This is true. sugrmag OK. This is not easy, obviously. HOw does this strategy sound to you?: 1. if both babies are head-first then vaginal birth; 2. if both are in positions other than head-first then it's like a message from God and hence obvious: c-section; 3. if baby A (one that gets out first) is head-down but baby B is not then...then what? trial labor perhaps, to see if baby A is born normally in a reasonable time and then baby B gets--or is brought--into the right position for vaginal birth? Good strategy or too simplistic? (this will probably require several last minute ultrasound scans as well...) One question! I know there is a difference between last minute c-sections and emergency c-sections and since trial labor is generally advised can the woman attempt trial labor while she is in active labor for a short period of time, say 10 to 30 minutes and see if baby A comes out easily and if not then switch to the c-section. Is there a point of no return (as is in an orgasm when the baby gets so close to the cervix opening during trial labor as to somehow complicate (or even make impossible?) subsequent c-section? In other words, can you always safely revert to c-section after any trial labor no matter what?
My mother had us twins (my sister and I) naturally, no pain killers, and went through 28 hours of labor. We actually made it all the way to our due date, and were born in 1982, before doctors were pressuring women into c-sections. If she had us now they probably would have given her a c-section, but we obviously didn't need it. We were both 6lbs and came out healthy and active. I am pregnant now myself with my first baby, and refuse to be pressured into a c-section unless there is an urgent medical reason. Planning a c-section is out of the question. I've had abdominal surgeries and the recovery is very painful, somehting a new mother should not have to deal with when also caring for a newborn. Also, I intend to breastfeed and want both myself and my baby to be aware and healthy enough to begin breastfeeding immeadeatly after birth. As much as I would like an easy delivery and any pain meds available because I'm a wuss, what I want more is to give my baby a natural start at life and the energy to feed and bond with me immeadeatly.
Do you have any other kids? A doctor will be more open to a vaginal delivery if your wife has already have a vaginal delivery. The plain truth is c-section's always have risks. Planned one's especially because on occasion the dates are wrong and the surgery is done too early. Keep in mind doctors recommend c-sections for twins because of fear of liability not for any real justifiable medical reason. There is no reason to have a c-section just bcause you have twins. I know many people who have vaginallly birthed twins. It can be done. C-section has a lot of risks. most are done under an edpidural anesthesia which also has it'sown set risks. It is surgery and you will have to follow surgical protocols which include no food or fluids prior to the surgery which can be draining on a pregnant woman. I uderstand your wife's concerns. But If I were you I would request to try to let labor start naturally. Twins are already smaller and need the extra time to grow. As long as the babies are in a vertex/vertex (head down) position you should be at least given the chance to attempt a vaginal birth. If on or both babies are a persistant breech or transverse, you will have to have a scheduled c-section. Most doctors would insist.
I had my emergency c-section AFTER Virginia was crowning. The umbilical cord was prolapsed (coming out before the head) so my doctor literally had to jump on my bed and hold her inside of me until I was ready for surgery. It can be done up until the last second and in the middle of a vaginal delivery...
Thank you lola78 for your insightful comments. This is my wife's first pregnancy. sugrmag, thanks a lot. This was a very useful piece of information, indeed! I really don't understand why some calendar date should decide anything this important, docs should look at what a woman's body responses are, not some arbitrary date, especially when it cannot be precisely ascertained.
I had my twins via c-section. I was going to try and have them vaginally (when it comes to pain I'm a wuss, but the knowledge that my hospital administered epidurals for all twin births helped with that decision ). It was discovered that I had pre-eclampsia (thanks to my home blood-pressure monitor, and being swollen up like a balloon) and I had to be induced. I had the epidural but the labour failed to progress, apparently the presenting twin didn't want to push down into the correct position (can't remember what that's called now). When the epidural wore off it seemed to me like I was just having one long contraction! Anyway, it was decided that I should have the c-section. Now, about the c-section... mine was a piece of cake and so was the recovery. Apart from some very minor tenderness for a day or two (and a large scar) it was like nothing had happened. But this isn't true for everyone.
