Which do you think are the pros and cons of inducing birth?

Question

on a normal baby, who happens to be just about 40 weeks and is in no danger, except low weight? Thanks for your input.

Answer 1

Let the baby take its course.

If there are complications, some action may need to be taken. Otherwise, the baby and your body will decide.

Not like that woman who had a Ceasarian early so her husband wouldn't miss the Bears/Saints game.

Answer 2

I've been induce with all 3 of my children and plan on being induced with this one. I've never had a problem with under weight babies. (Mine always tend to be a bit on the bigger side, never less than 8 lbs 6 oz, which is why they induce me). There are many pros and cons to induction. It really is a decision you need to make with your doctor. Some cons are that your body may reject being put into labor, you could fail to progress and need a c section. The induction could also over stimulate your uterus (I've have this happen, it is not fun), this causes your uterus to contract harder, more rapidly, and more painfully. Also I have been told (but I wouldn't know) that people who are induced have more painful contractions than those who aren't. Some pros are that you pretty much know what day you are having the baby. If you have older children this gives you ample time to get them off to where ever they are staying for the duration of your hospital stay (a really good upside lol). Another benefit is for women who tend to carry larger babies, there is a lower chance of having a c section than if you got to or past your due date. Honestly, I wouldn't know what to do if I went into labor on my own lol.

Answer 3

If both mum and bub are healthy and happy, it's best to let nature take it's course. An induction at 42 weeks is vital though. If you go to overdue it can be both dangerous to mum and bub.
Being induced is a lot more painful than going into labour naturally. With an induction the contractions are bought on medically and your body doesn't have time to prepare before you get slammed with contraction after contraction. When you go into labour naturally the contractions start off slow and get closer and closer so your body is adjusting to the birth at it's own pace.
If the baby is underweight a little more time to grow in the womb isn't going to do it any harm.

Answer 4

1) low birth weight/small for gestational age is not "no problem". It is a very serious problem. However ultrasounds are not very good at predicting size. So you need to weigh just how small and how accurate you think the estimate thing. Feel free to get a second opinion and DEMAND to see the senior ultrasound technician. (Unless you mean your weight is low, in which case that is fine. I lost tonnes or weight when pregnant)


2) Induction is always risky. It isn't just the induction you are also risking a whole host of other interventions. I couldn't even being to touch upon them all here.
This is a decent article:
http://www.mothering.com/articles/pregnancy_birth/birth_preparation/inducing.html

3) Say not to cytotec. The FDA says no, so should you.

Answer 5

Same thing happened to me. My baby was becoming "growth retarded" in the womb. That meant instead of growing, he was losing weight. My labor was induced. I labored for 30 hours. The Petocin they used gave me tremendous contractions, but my cervix never dilated past one centimeter. I ended up with a Cesarean section.
He was born weighing 3lbs. 14 oz., and was 21 inches long, but other than being tiny he was perfectly fine. Today he is 22, stands 6' tall, weighs over 200 lbs and is the joy of my life! Happy ending. It doesn't matter how they get here, just get them here healthy!

Answer 6

from my experience, an induced labor is much more painful than a natural one. my first labor was completely natural, no painkillers or anything, because there was no time for it. i went into labor 6 weeks early, and i just barely made it to the hospital on time. with my second child, i had to be induced at 36 weeks due to late decels, and the pain of labor was much worse, i couldn't take it, and i had to cave and get the epidural.

moral of the story, if you're wanting to not use an epidural, then a natural labor would be best. if you're planning on having an epidural anyway, then there's no problem with inducing.

congrats and good luck!

Answer 7

There is nothing wrong with it...i had inductions with both my kids....My daughter was 9 and a half pounds and was a week late and still would not come...that is why we induced...it still took 26 hours for her to be born...they had to give me 2 doses of it. For my son...he wighed 7 pds, 11 ounces at birth and he was an induced baby too as my mother had just died suddenly at age 64 years old and he needed to be born so i could be well enough to attend my mother's funeral..plus with all the stress of my mother's death..it was just the best thing....It took 5 hours for him to be born!!! They are now 8 and almost 1 years old and very healthy kids!!!

Answer 8

With my second child, labor didn't start---even though my water broke nearly 24 hrs before---so the Dr made the decision to induce labor. It was still a very long labor and much, much more painful than when my first child had been born. If you are able to let nature take its course, I would highly recommend it.

Answer 9

I was induced twice. With my daughter I was induced at 42 weeks and 6 days and she came out at 43 weeks.
My son I was induced because there was to much water in my placenta.
I really say there is no pros of being induced. I thought it was so painful. I hated it.
Both my children came out fine my daughter was 8lbs 6Oz's and my son was 9lbs 15 Oz's.

Answer 10

I wouldnt do it.....especially if the weight is low.......obviously baby needs some extra cooking lol. Inducing labor is very difficult on your body and makes the labor harder on you and stresses baby ........i would use it as a last resort after you have gone 42 weeks