Published Jun 22, 2006
2curlygirls
220 Posts
"nothing good happens after 40 weeks"-Your thoughts???
fergus51
6,620 Posts
I'm not that strict. I have seen normal babies born at 41 and even 42+ weeks. If it were me I'd be induced at 41. That's just me.
lovemyjob
344 Posts
post dates = mec aspiration!! Not to mention CPD (cephalopelic disproportion) and shoulder dystocia.
Post dates does not come without risks, just like preemies or near-termers. I would also be induced at 41 weeks as long as my dates were close to accurate.
Mimi2RN, ASN, RN
1,142 Posts
post dates = mec aspiration!! Not to mention CPD (cephalopelic disproportion) and shoulder dystocia.Post dates does not come without risks, just like preemies or near-termers. I would also be induced at 41 weeks as long as my dates were close to accurate.
Some of them look like they have lost weight. They are frequently poor feeders, and peeling so much that the parents want to put lotion on. I tell them they just got pickled, and the skin will peel off anyway.
Yeah, the placenta is not as efficient at providing nutrients/o2 when they are post either. They ar more likely to be oligo and then more likely tol be intolerant of labor because of the cord compression and the old placenta. The risks are a'plenty when it is a true postdates. They are also more likely to be C/S because of the FTP and/or decels.
Gompers, BSN, RN
2,691 Posts
I agree with this - there is no medical benefit for letting a baby go beyond 40 weeks. Plus bad things can happen - placenta problems, meconium, distocia, cord accidents, etc. Of course, all of that stuff can happen BEFOFE 40 weeks, too, but once you hit 40 weeks, there is no good reason to keep the baby in utero.
Like the others, I'd probably be induced at 41 weeks myself. It's better to go into labor yourself and avoid induction, so hopefully by 41 weeks it'll happen naturally. Plus wth dates often being +/- 2 weeks, waiting until 41 weeks makes the baby at least 39 weeks gestation so safe to deliver anyways.
dawngloves, BSN, RN
2,399 Posts
It's not a given, but when I see there is a 41 weeker on L&D I do say a quick prayer.
got a 40 1/7 weeker (dates were obviously off) last PM...mec aspiration and C/S for FTP. That kid's peeling skin could have been scraped off with snow shovel! A bit more than 40 1/7 weeks I would say!
gr8rnpjt, RN
738 Posts
I had my first 2 daughters in the early 80's and my OB never talked about inducing. I was 3 weeks and 4 days late with each one and they were both NVD's with good outcomes. I should say that my first born was transferred to a hospital with a special care nursery due to suspected feeding problems but after 5 days of tests all they could find was reflux.
I had no choice, my OB did not discuss it and my dates were verified with each one. That does not mean I would not have wanted to be induced if it had been discussed. I would have jumped at the chance to deliver early. 43 4/7 weeks is a long time to be pregnant...
babynurselsa, RN
1,129 Posts
The sickest kiddos I have ever cared for have been post date babies. They make me more nervous than a premie anyday.
Nothing like when they rupture and that old old old mec stained fluid starts rolling out.........
jess_m
26 Posts
I was a 43 weeker and had no problems other than having to be born c-sect because I was 10 lbs (just imagine what I would have been if I was born a few weeks earlier -12 maybe). I was also born with mec but I did not aspirate. My daughter was induced the day I turned 41 weeks because I was afraid of c-sect. She was fine and did not have mec until that night (2-3 hours post delivery).
The couple of weeks dates can be off can make quite a difference. We have had babies that supposedly deliver before the due date, come out mec and peeling. The parents are so surprised when their baby is in the NICU with mec aspiration, and we tell them it was post dates.
And the other end of the spectrum....the 37/38 week scheduled C/S that turns out to be a chicken tender 35/36 weeker.