Induce at 39??

Hello - i went in for my 35 wk check up and my doctor asked if i was interested in being induced at 39 weeks. She referenced this Harvard study (below). I am really torn and not sure what to do. I am 37 but no health issues during this pregnancy. My husband is in favor for a few things: we live an hour away from the hospital so we could have it planned if i am induced, thevstudy shows a huge decline with still births and well, the doc brought it up. My first was 10 days late and i ended up being induced with him. Doc feels this one would end up in the same situation at 41 wks also.

I would really like your thoughts ladies.

https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/inducing-labor-a-way-to-avoid-a-cesarean-2018030713391

286 views • 2 upvotes • 14 comments

COMMENT (14)

Jo

Posted at
I'm a believer that baby will come when ready. Some interventions can cause further cause for concern.. but it truly is a personal choice 😊

\`

Posted at
I'm going to induce at 39. I did with last one due to pregnancy complications but will this time regardless. Don't want to chance a loss, and we don't have family in town to take care of DD so it helps to have a firmer date.

Ka

Posted at
I begged for an induction at my 40 week checkup with my 1st (I was turning 24 that week). They did a cytotech (pill, not pitocin) induction and almost sent me home because they thought I was headed for a cesarean but my water broke in the lobby and she was born vaginally 12 hours later, no complications.This time, I will be 39, and though DH is pushing for a scheduled cesarean (his 2 were both scheduled and he likes the neatness of a plan and schedule lol), I'm hoping for a vaginal birth, preferably on my body/baby's timetable.That said, I'm a firm believer that a healthy baby is a blessing, however he/she arrives so I will be open to my doctor's recommendations and not quibble. God has been giving me what I need on His time table so I'm sticking to that.I read the article you posted (and 2 others on the topic) as well and a 3% reduction in the likelihood of a C-section doesn't seem like the biggest motivator to me. It specifically doesn't address older mothers and the study found no change in outcomes for babies.... So...

Mo

Posted at
I would do it before 41 weeks, but not at 39 weeks unless medically necessary. Going overdue can be risky, but being 39+ or 40+ is typically not risky unless there's a reason why (eg hypertension or gestational diabetes) Just because you were late with your 1st doesn't mean it will happen with your 2nd. I was induced all of my pregnancies (medically necessary) and my 3rd and 4th both failed and I ended up in c sections. I wish I could have had the option to go into labor naturally.

Ra

Posted at
Sounds like dr is trying to plan a vacation...

Bu

Bunny_Bump • Mar 14, 2019
Nope, not at all. The practice has 3 doctors. I have been seen by all three so if one had a vacation, the other would just be the one helping with delivery. She brought up the study for us to consider.

Tr

Posted at
Question - do you know what you are having? Boys tend to come later and are larger at birth, so if you are having a boy I would do it for sure. The longer you wait the bigger the baby and the more risk to your personal health. If you are having a girl I might wait until 40, but no longer for sure. Sometimes “natural” isn’t always better. There is a reason that our infant mortality rate has dropped drastically, and taking extra precautions as an older mom just makes sense.

Bu

Bunny_Bump • Mar 14, 2019
Yes. It is a boy. My first was 8 lb 8 oz and we needed to use forceps. So scary. Thank you for your comment!

Cl

Posted at
I’m 38 , just had my 3rd 9 weeks ago. My first two I was overdue by 14 days and 12 days. I was induced at 38 + 4 , they offered induction between 38-39 weeks due to my age , my pregnancy was uncomplicated but I felt rubbish near the end so I was happy when they offered to take me in as I was also worrying about what could go wrong and just wanted my baby out. I had a very straight forward uncomplicated induction.

Ma

Posted at
I think this very much depends on your risk tolerance. I am seriously considering induction at 39-ish weeks, mostly because I am paranoid about stillbirth. Others might be more paranoid about interventions/C-section. It just depends on what worries you most.

Je

Posted at
I believe that study has serious criticism. I’m pushing back on trying to be induced due to my age only. MFM wants delivery at 39 weeks (Sunday) and I said give me a medical reason. There is none. So onward we go and I’m in horrible pain from SPD and sciatica.

Ti

Posted at
My OB talked to me about the same study. They also told me that they will let me go up until my due date, but not passed. So, if I do not go into labor naturally before my due date, I will be scheduled for induction on my actual due date. I’m okay with this plan because of the potential risks of going past due date because of my age. I am also 37. My firstborn came naturally 4 days before his due date and was an 8 pound baby. 🤞🏼this one comes on his own too!

Ti

Ti • Mar 15, 2019
We are planning to allow labor to start on its own up until my due date. My OB will have me come in for weekly NSTs to monitor baby. I believe that baby will come when he’s ready and I don’t want to force it and end up with an unnecessary c section when my first child came naturally at 39+3.

Bu

Bunny_Bump • Mar 14, 2019
So you are deciding to go to 40 wks even after hearing about the study.