Just following on from the waters breaking thread I noticed that some mums were 10cm when they had their waters broken for them. It's so rare for babies to be born in the caul these days (and it's supposed to be very lucky for the babies!)
Just wondering what the reasoning was behind this - or if it was discussed with you?
Sparklybabe - how do you 'navigate' this where you work?
Had waters broken to start labour both times, dont know if this counts though as it sounds different to what you are talking about Tracy.
On dd2 I was 10cm when they got me on the delivery table, then they did the ARM, with next contraction I pushed for 2 minutes and had dd2!
On dd3 I refused an ARM when I was 5cm, there was an attempted ARM at 8cm (there wasn't enough of a 'bulge' there for the midwife to pierce the waters, the membrane was 'tight' against dd3's head) and then my waters went partially by themselves at 10cm and then an ARM was conducted to fully release them and 2 contractions later I was pushing!
I often wonder what would have happened if they didn't do an ARM, whether the waters would have broken by themselves or not...
I am the 10cm woman!
Hi Silini and Hu I was wondering more about a Mum who's having a straight forward uncomplicated labour (rather than induction) and the reasoning behind interrupting things to release the waters without a good reason. A friend of mine was having a very straight forward labour a few weeks ago and at 8cm her MW asked to break the waters and things went drastically downhill from there. Things might have gone pear shaped anyway but Mum was doing brilliantly, labour progressing well and baby was very happy but when the waters were released the cord wasn't protected anymore with the fluid and her baby started to become distressed and Mum ended up with a very difficult assisted birth. She's wondering if she'd been left alone would things have gone differently. We're trained to leave the waters alone unless there's a compelling reason to do otherwise but it looks like it just depends on the Midwife on the day.
On dd3 it was the consultant who wanted to break the waters, the midwife was quite happy to let things be, and when I said I didn't want an ARM, she phoned him to say not to come! I totally agree ARM shouldn't be done unless there is a good reason.
I had a normal routine labour, no induction things progressing well but slowly. My waters were broken for me at 8cm. Reading this now I am actually not sure why as baba not distressed or anything. My labour still progressed fine and I gave birth with no assistance but interesting to read that without waters baba not protected anymore?? This is obvious now but I never thought of it before. Will make me think on this one.
I'm a bit fuzzy on the details now as the contractions were very fast and strong at that stage, but I think the midwife said things weren't moving because the waters hadn't broken and she asked me if it was alright to break them to keep things progressing and I agreed. I didn't get the impression they were trying to rush things for the sake of time as I progressed quite quickly after getting to the hospital. Luckily it didn't have any negative impact or slow things down.
[quote="The Oracle (formerly hu101)":3eppmnk9]I am the 10cm woman! [/quote:3eppmnk9]
Me too but didn't have an uncomplicated birth though but was pretty straightforward up until the pushing part.
Don't know why she did it really, she just said she was going to & then did it.
Mine were broken. My understanding is that labour was not progressing. I was admitted at 3cm and 8 or so hours later I was only 4cm (if even that). I think it was felt that breaking the waters would be a better way to move things along than oxytocin. I know there may not be real imperative to 'speed things up' but I am actually glad they did as I was totally exhausted.
Contrary to a lot people, I found it fine, midwife ruptured them on a contraction, no major discomfort and things still progressed relatively slowly after so no dramatic shift in my labour.