VBAC??

I had a chat today with a friend who delivered her second child naturally, following the caesarean birth of her first some years previously. I was of the impression she had a rotten time of it and would be loathe to recommend a VBAC.

On the contrary, she said she'd do it again happily, it was far better. She had it as a trial of labour, which is where they let you go into labour, but will intervene and section if there are any complications.

Which sounds ok. They won't induce you, or they shouldn't, or to put it another way, if it is me they will not be inducing me. I don't know what Forth Park do, but a lot of hospitals constantly monitor the foetus for any signs of distress. The "experts" say that they shouldn't because the likelihood of any complications are lessened the more active a birth can be. "They" also don't recommend epidurals for the same reason, which loses me a bit.

Reasons to intervene and perform a c section include:

Foetal distress
Failure to progress in a sensible time frame
Mother changes her mind about a natural birth

When I hear tales of people who have their children easily, quickly (for a labour) and relatively painfree-ally then I think, well, do I really want unnecessary surgery for no reason? Diabolical it may be, but it is all over once it's over. No big recovery (apart from the ripped bits, ugh). And supposedly you feel dead proud and all that. But supposedly you also feel close to suicide if you cannot breastfeed and I sure don't sign up to that school of thought. I didn't feel bad about any of it last time and I failed all my NCT badges of honour.

Basically, my aim is a healthy baby. It is my considered opinion that I don't want the risks of a failed natural delivery, and so an elective section would remove those risks. But maybe - maybe - a trial of labour would see if the normal/sensible/conventional/nonsurgical method could work, with consultants and what not on hand to operate if required would be a good way to proceed. Maybe.

We'll see what they say at the scan. If the baby's a sensible size, in a sensible position and all looks shiny, I could be persuaded to try on the strict understanding it's a trial not a no-matter-what, and that in the event of going overdue they perform a section rather than leaving me to overcook or any hint of induction.

Possibly. I have a meeting with the consultant at 34 weeks to discuss the birth.

Baby is currently at least two or three centimetres higher than should be. Not mad, confirmed by heartbeat. This can be indicative of a breech position, or placenta praevia - where the placenta covers the cervix, both of which are situations where a section would be essential. So as I say, we'll see what they say at the scan. (We'll not think about the bad things that can be indicated with a large for dates uterus). Most likely it's due to having a stretched and battered uterus having had twins last time.

Or there's a twin in there this time and it was hiding at the scan...