Does your dr. do ultrasounds in 3rd trimester?

[bw52]

Just wondering the chances of having another one. I'd like to just be reassured this baby really is a girl before getting everything ready. I should just trust the anatomy scan, but it threw me completely off-guard (I was SURE it was a boy!), so I would just like 1 more peek before she arrives.

Is this uncommon to do u/s in the 3rd trimester? I can't remember last time.

[MommyAllison]

With DD, I had one when I was overdue to check fluid level. No 3rd tri ultrasound w/DS. With this baby, I'm having one at 29wks to recheck an issue found earlier, but otherwise, no more ultrasounds planned.

I haven't heard of anyone having routine third tri ultrasounds - just to check on an existing issue, or because they are overdue.

[llama8]

It is the norm where I live to get an ultrasound around 30-32 weeks. They check growth and position.

[waitingforgrace]

I will have one near my due date to check size and position of baby but only due to issues we had with DD. I had one the day I went into labor with DD because I was concerned she was big so they did it to calm my nerves.

You could always pay to have an ultrasound if you just want to confirm gender.

[AnnieW625]

With DD1 I had to do one at 32 weeks to check for placenta previa, which had been seen in the 20 week u/s. I also got a few quick scans at appointments because the machine happened to be in the room, but nothing really invasive.

With DD2 I didn't have any u/s in the third trimester.

[BabyBearsMom]

My doctor only does it if you are at risk (past due date, placenta previa, need to be induced early for some reason). My last one was at 20 weeks.

[WolfpackMom]

My doctor only does it if you are at risk (past due date, placenta previa, need to be induced early for some reason). My last one was at 20 weeks.

Same here, only if medically necessary. As PP said, you could always pay for one at one of those ultrasound places just for piece of mind about the gender.

[BabbyO]

My doc said he typically does an in-office scan/ultrasound to check position and growth at or after the 35 wk mark. I don't remember this with DS...but I'm sure he did it since it was just 2 yrs ago. I'll be having mine at one of the next two appts. and I'm kinda glad because I'm not sure that this guy has turned all the way...based on the movements, etc it seems like he maybe transverse.

[Snow mom]

Ask your doctor--I'm sure they can tell you what their standard practice is. My doctor does a quick ultrasound at 36 weeks for growth and position. I will say that at that stage you see much less (like we had a picture off DDs ear from that ultrasound where at 20 weeks it was more her whole head.) Her butt was squished up into my rib cage at 36 weeks so it was hard to see that she was in fact a she but I was nervous about this too and asked them to check.

[SnuggleBuggles]

Not the norm here and I'm glad. I think people can be too quick to make decisions like induce or c-section due to baby's estimated size as a result of those u/s. My CNMs were skilled enough to know position without an u/s. With ds2 they guesstimated his weight by touch. I did, however, have ultrasounds (biophysical profiles) with both in the 41st week to check on baby's health. Had I not been that far over my EDD I wouldn't have had one.

Beth

[eh613c]

For both pregnancies, my OB did an ultrasound at around 35 or 37 weeks to make sure the baby is in position. She also took measurements to ensure the baby isn't too big for vaginal delivery.

[SnuggleBuggles]

For both pregnancies, my OB did an ultrasound at around 35 or 37 weeks to make sure the baby is in position. She also took measurements to ensure the baby isn't too big for vaginal delivery.

That's what worries me. Everything I have read, even from the stuffy American College of OB/ Gyns is that no one can predict how big is too big till a good try of L&D with mom and baby in a good position. I wouldn't want a number playing with my head while in labor ["is labor slow b/c baby is too big? should I just have a c-section??"]. Or playing with my care provider's mind and making them consider things they wouldn't consider if that # weren't floating out there.

Sorry to go off on a tangent!!

Beth

[swissair81]

That's what worries me. Everything I have read, even from the stuffy American College of OB/ Gyns is that no one can predict how big is too big till a good try of L&D with mom and baby in a good position. I wouldn't want a number playing with my head while in labor ["is labor slow b/c baby is too big? should I just have a c-section??"]. Or playing with my care provider's mind and making them consider things they wouldn't consider if that # weren't floating out there.

Sorry to go off on a tangent!!

Beth

I worked at a research hospital when I worked in L & D, and we nurses participated in a fetal size/ultrasound reliability study. The results were what you might expect. Just about every baby they scanned predelivery was a completely different size than indicated. Also, the mistakes almost always err on the side of making the baby bigger. It wasn't a problem for me when they did one when I was in labor with DD1 to determine position (also a stupid reason)- she was 6 lbs 5 oz, and the u/s said she would be 7.5 lbs (more than a pound off), but it might make a huge difference to someone with a much larger baby).

Also, I had a crazy amount of ultrasounds with my last pregnancy- at least every month (if not more), and I never would have done one 'just because'.

[BayGirl2]

I will have one in-office next week at my 36 week appt. I believe the primary purpose is to check position, which I would like to know. At my last appt she couldn't really tell if the baby was heads down by a manual external exam. If the baby is breech I'd like to know so I can take some measures to try to turn her in the last month.

For the last pregnancy my OB estimated size by external measurements, not by the US. The margin of error was +/- 2 lbs and I don't think they do much based on that measurement - but I have a fairly progressive hospital. That pregnancy I had high BP so I went for non-stress tests 2x/week for the last 3 weeks before my due date. Lots of US because of that, but I did not consider that particularly dangerous at that stage, especially since there was a medical reason for them.

[anonomom]

Depends on your doctor and how your pregnancy is going. I got LOTS of third trimester ultrasounds with my younger DD, when I was planning to try for a VBAC. Seems it was very, very important to my providers to prove the baby was too big and that I really needed a c-section. So I got a 37-week ultrasound and weekly NSTs until she was born at 40.5 weeks (weighing 8 pounds, btw).

This time around, I have already agreed to a c-section. Lo and behold, no ultrasounds since our 19-week anatomy scan. I kind of wish I'd get one, for the same reason you list -- they told us that baby is a boy, but it'd be great to just get a double-check and some reassurance that they were right.

[swissair81]

I will have one in-office next week at my 36 week appt. I believe the primary purpose is to check position, which I would like to know. At my last appt she couldn't really tell if the baby was heads down by a manual external exam. If the baby is breech I'd like to know so I can take some measures to try to turn her in the last month.

For the last pregnancy my OB estimated size by external measurements, not by the US. The margin of error was +/- 2 lbs and I don't think they do much based on that measurement - but I have a fairly progressive hospital. That pregnancy I had high BP so I went for non-stress tests 2x/week for the last 3 weeks before my due date. Lots of US because of that, but I did not consider that particularly dangerous at that stage, especially since there was a medical reason for them.

+/- 2lbs is a huge margin of error. Let's say they tell you your baby is 8 lbs- the margin of error means that he/she could be anywhere from 6-10 lbs. In other words, the u/s estimate is worthless. I could have told you that probability without the ultrasound.

If your doctor can't tell the baby's position, that is something else entirely.

[indigo99]

I'll be having one in a couple of weeks to check the baby's size. DS was too large for me to deliver vaginally, and I'm going to just schedule a c-section if this one is as large. Based on my last ultrasound, his head measured 90percentile so I'm fully expecting to go that route. Otherwise, we would induce early before he gets so very large to give me a better chance, but I don't want to go through all that just to end up with a section again.

[anonomom]

+/- 2lbs is a huge margin of error. Let's say they tell you your baby is 8 lbs- the margin of error means that he/she could be anywhere from 6-10 lbs. In other words, the u/s estimate is worthless. I could have told you that probability without the ultrasound.

If your doctor can't tell the baby's position, that is something else entirely.

:yeahthat:

At 37 weeks, they told me that DD ALREADY weighed 8 lbs, 12 oz and that with the margin of error she was possibly already over 10 pounds and would only get bigger. Yes, this is the same kid who was born 3.5 weeks later at 8 lbs even.

[llama8]

My ultrasound was right on the money with both DD's.

My first DD was predicted to be 9 lbs even and she was 9 lbs even.

My second DD was predicted to be 7 lb 5 oz and she was 7 lb 8 oz.

The ultrasounds and predictions are not always way off.

[BayGirl2]

+/- 2lbs is a huge margin of error. Let's say they tell you your baby is 8 lbs- the margin of error means that he/she could be anywhere from 6-10 lbs. In other words, the u/s estimate is worthless. I could have told you that probability without the ultrasound.

If your doctor can't tell the baby's position, that is something else entirely.

That was my point. They weren't using the US to estimate size, and I don't think a csection or other delivery changes would be based on that. Unless of course other concerns arise from the US. The main purpose was to see the baby's positioning.

[Melanie]

I only did when I had problems (Gallbladder). Else I wasn't offered and wouldn't have asked.

[swissair81]

That was my point. They weren't using the US to estimate size, and I don't think a csection or other delivery changes would be based on that. Unless of course other concerns arise from the US. The main purpose was to see the baby's positioning.

You would actually be surprised at how often OB-GYNs schedule primary c-sections based solely on the u/s size estimate. It's quite disheartening.

[sste]

Well, I am the one person who would have benefited from knowing in advance I had a humungous baby! I was pretty outside the norm though for delivery.

My OB is a big fan of not US for weight, etc. and that in a normal vaginal birth situation it usually works out. However, in a high risk or complicated birth I do suspect there is a place for ultrasounding for size.

FWIW, my DH and I almost fainted in the labor room when the ultrasound for position measured our baby at 10.8 pounds. Everyone was very supportive of trying for a vaginal birth and in fact DH and I were the ones begging them for anecdotes of wildly inaccurate ultrasounds. I grilled my OB, the nurse, the radiologist and all of them said that an ultrasound like that right before delivery they rarely see off by more than a pound. I don't know if that has something to do with the timing of my US or the hospital or who was doing the read, I just don't know. But, despite my practically begging everyone consistently reported they were accurate in their professional experience and no one could recall a time it was off by more than a pound. In my case it was within 6 oz. of actual birth weight. Unfortunately.

[BayGirl2]

You would actually be surprised at how often OB-GYNs schedule primary c-sections based solely on the u/s size estimate. It's quite disheartening.

Oh, I don't doubt that. I'm sure there are plenty of Dr.'s who will, given the typical rate of c sections. But I don't think it's the protocol for my HC system. I have Kaiser and they are generally very progressive about natural birth practices, VBAC, BFing, etc. including minimizing c sections. I may ask my OB next week though, I am curious if a. They use the US for sizing and b. If they consider an US if the baby is huge.

[rileysmom]

My OB/midwife office does one at 36 weeks to check the size of the baby. It's a routine thing for their office.

[brittone2]

No, and I wouldn't want one unless there were other concerns or complicating risk factors.

Like others, I think many people run the risk of having a doc want to induce for size, etc. which tends to be poorly supported by the evidence. And US are still +/- a pound or so in most cases. So the "huge" baby may not be big at all in reality.

[BayGirl2]

OK, I had my 36 week appt yesterday, which I knew would include an in-office ultrasound, so I asked my OB about it. During the U/S she checked baby's positioning, quality of the placenta (no calcification) and the level of amniotic fluid. She also looked at whether it was "still a girl", at my request. She did NOT take any measurements of the baby during the U/S. Before the U/S she had already measured my belly (standard for every visit) and did the Group B strep swab. Her only comment on size was that the baby looked normal and not very big, no specific weight range.

So I asked if they ever use the U/S to decide on a C-section because of the baby's size? And was it Kaiser's policy not to? She said she's pretty sure it's ACOG's policy not to do that. She said maybe if the baby looked "OMG Huge" on the U/S they would start to discuss options, but in general she and her colleagues wouldn't suggest moving right to C-section. If someone goes into labor naturally they would at least try for a vaginal birth first.

So that is one perspective that I wanted to add to the discussion. I'm sure that there are Dr's that take a different approach and are way more open to going straight to C/S. And I am sure there are patients who request an elective C/S if they think the baby is larger than they can handle (actually DH's cousin is very small and did that, but her Kaiser Dr. talked them out of it and she had a vaginal birth). Kaiser tends to be fairly progressive and their policies tend to aim toward natural and preventative care before more invasive/expensive options like surgery. That's one reason I've been happy with them, and although they are not perfect, feel like I have a lot of say in my HC and the Dr's there are generally looking in the right direction.

I find the 36 week U/S very reassuring bc I feel like a lot can happen in 20 weeks and I am one of those people who wants all the info I can get. Maybe part of that is bc w/ DS I had so many non-stress tests that I got to see him every few days in the last month, so it just seemed normal to know how he was positioned, that fluid was ok, etc.

[Melaine]

My friend and neighbor just delivered her first baby boy (they have another sweet boy who was adopted) about 10 days past her due date. As a first time mom she told me that her doctors were pushing her to schedule a C-section because the baby was so big. When she delivered him naturally (YAY for her!) (mind you this was over 2 weeks after the doctors estimated his weight) he wound up being only a bit over 7.5 lbs. So not big at all for his age. I was so frustrated for her sake that he doctors were so pushy about his weight and wanting to schedule a C for their own convenience. I'm so glad she did it on her own.
My girls, on the other hand, were estimated to be significantly less than they were at birth. The ultrasound minutes before my C-section gave us an estimate of almost 4 lbs for one and 3 lbs and a couple ozs for the other. They both came out at 4lbs 4oz.
*If* we ever have a pregnancy that isn't twins and there aren't complications I would try to avoid extra ultrasounds. With the girls I had tons.

[daisymommy]

Fwiw...I can think of 2 mamas here on the BBB that I remember posting their docs did the ultrasound, said baby looked too big for the moms pelvis, and was pushing them to skip labor and go straight to a C-section. And that's just here in "our little world". And I do remember that both moms said baby ended up being average size (7-ish pounds).

[indigo99]

As someone considering a VBAC, I definitely want an ultrasound to look at the size of the baby. I was fully dilated and had pushed for two hours when I had my section with DS. Having a large baby is one reason that as many as 4/10 of women who do a VBAC trial of labor end up with another section, and if it doesn't look like I'll be able to push this one out either then I would much rather just schedule the c-section than go through labor AND a section again.

[SnuggleBuggles]

As someone considering a VBAC, I definitely want an ultrasound to look at the size of the baby. I was fully dilated and had pushed for two hours when I had my section with DS. Having a large baby is one reason that as many as 4/10 of women who do a VBAC trial of labor end up with another section, and if it doesn't look like I'll be able to push this one out either then I would much rather just schedule the c-section than go through labor AND a section again.

I understand that! Just curious about the position (anterior, posterior...) of your first and whether they checked on that/ will check on that this time? That was my big question with ds2 bc ds1 was posterior and that brought on extra challenges.

Beth

[indigo99]

I understand that! Just curious about the position (anterior, posterior...) of your first and whether they checked on that/ will check on that this time? That was my big question with ds2 bc ds1 was posterior and that brought on extra challenges.

Beth

Everything looked perfect with DS1. He was anterior, and I was already dilated about 3-4cm when we induced at 39 weeks (my choice because my doctor was about to go on maternity leave and because DS looked large on u/s). Everything went fine, and it looked like I would be in labor less than 6 hours. Then his head got in the way, and I took a while to get from 8 to 10cm and just couldn't push his head down even with suction. When he was delivered, he was 8lb15oz, and my doctor said that there was no way I could have gotten his head out on my own. It is very wide at the crown and measures in the +99% now (not sure about then but he did have some head molding at birth anyway).

We'll do an ultrasound at 36 weeks to check on his size and position, but it appears that this one is just as big. I already decided not to try the VBAC unless everything looks perfect and/or I go into labor on my own early while he may be small enough to deliver vaginally. I do have an anterior placenta this time too to further complicate the matter.

[llama8]

Everything looked perfect with DS1. He was anterior, and I was already dilated about 3-4cm when we induced at 39 weeks (my choice because my doctor was about to go on maternity leave and because DS looked large on u/s). Everything went fine, and it looked like I would be in labor less than 6 hours. Then his head got in the way, and I took a while to get from 8 to 10cm and just couldn't push his head down even with suction. When he was delivered, he was 8lb15oz, and my doctor said that there was no way I could have gotten his head out on my own. It is very wide at the crown and measures in the +99% now (not sure about then but he did have some head molding at birth anyway).

We'll do an ultrasound at 36 weeks to check on his size and position, but it appears that this one is just as big. I already decided not to try the VBAC unless everything looks perfect and/or I go into labor on my own early while he may be small enough to deliver vaginally. I do have an anterior placenta this time too to further complicate the matter.

Both my DD's had anterior placenta's and it did not complicate either c-section (just to give you piece of mind).

[indigo99]

Both my DD's had anterior placenta's and it did not complicate either c-section (just to give you piece of mind).

That's good. I was wondering about how it might affect a VBAC though given the chance for the incision to open back up. Two of my friends had a ruptured uterus and have me worried, but I'm pretty sure I won't be going down that road anyway.

[daisymommy]

I know this is getting off topic ;) But I wanted to add it's all about positing with babies and mothers, in how easy and long the pushing stage is.

With the typical medical model of child birthing, where a mom is flat on her back, often with an epi, it's no wonder many women cannot get a baby pushed out without major effort, or sometimes not at all. You never hear a doctor tell moms to get up and squat, or push while sitting up, or on all 4's, etc. But that will open up your pelvic bones by an extra 30% !

Also, if baby is not aligned properly--more than just plain anterior or posterior--(which can be achieved through techniques such as those found on the spinning babies website)--it can be a long pushing stage, or sometimes failure to descend. With baby #3, born at home, he was posterior facing, but the midwives could tell by palpitating my belly that he was not in the optimum position for pushing. I was at 10cm. for 1.5 hrs and never felt the urge to push at all. They said if I started pushing, it could be very painful, and not work well.
So, they had me doing all sorts of special yoga-looking positions to get him moved a bit, then all of sudden I could feel his head turn a little, and out and he started to come!

I just feel frustrated for moms, especially those having a VBAC, whose doctors have them on their backs, have no idea about positioning of baby other than posterior/anterior, and then when mom can't push baby out, they're stuck with another C-section.

I would have a doula or midwife at the hospital to help with these things if I were attempting a VBAC.

[indigo99]

I know this is getting off topic ;) But I wanted to add it's all about positing with babies and mothers, in how easy and long the pushing stage is.

Good advice, but I had an epidural so I couldn't really do a lot of different pushing positions. I was actually needing to start a new vial of medicine anyway so they let the epidural wear off to help with the pushing. It wore off on my stomach so that I was in a lot of pain, but my legs were completely numb and useless still.

[daisymommy]

I'm sorry :(
Just one of the many reasons I hated getting an epidural with #1, and swore I wouldn't do it again with my next two. It's hard to everything to work in harmony in labor, when you can't position yourself in way that makes it easier for you to deliver.

[BayGirl2]

With the typical medical model of child birthing, where a mom is flat on her back, often with an epi, it's no wonder many women cannot get a baby pushed out without major effort, or sometimes not at all. You never hear a doctor tell moms to get up and squat, or push while sitting up, or on all 4's, etc. But that will open up your pelvic bones by an extra 30% !


Totally agree with this. I find the on my back, knees in the air position just generally uncomfortable and planned to try alternative positions with DS. I had one nurse who insisted that that was the way to do it, nothing else would work. It was incredibly frustrating bc I'd already been in back labor for ~24 hours, had finally decided (against my plan, but at my request) to get an epidural, and just knew that there were better positions. Finally I agreed I would try her way, but she would "let me" try other ways too. I ended up hating the traditional flat on the back position and ended up in a hybrid position using the birthing bar. Still had to push for 2:45, but it did work. The other nurses and Dr's were helpful and flexible, luckily that one got switched away from me after a while, she was a PITA.

[bisous]

This is so interesting to me. DS1 was only 8 lbs 4 oz (so not huge--he does have a big head though!) but it was the doctors assessment that it was his position and not necessarily his size that caused the delivery to go from "vaginal" to "c-section". I think there is a lot of validity to the idea of laboring in other positions but with my epidural I was TOTALLY numb and unable to move around. But honestly, I don't know if I was "ready" to embrace the idea of trying to labor without an epidural. It seemed very foreign to my worldview and my social circle. Now of course I'm tempted to look back and wish I'd done "natural" labor to see if that would have prevented my c-section but realistically, I wasn't "there" 8 years ago! Does that make sense?

[BayGirl2]

This is so interesting to me. DS1 was only 8 lbs 4 oz (so not huge--he does have a big head though!) but it was the doctors assessment that it was his position and not necessarily his size that caused the delivery to go from "vaginal" to "c-section". I think there is a lot of validity to the idea of laboring in other positions but with my epidural I was TOTALLY numb and unable to move around. But honestly, I don't know if I was "ready" to embrace the idea of trying to labor without an epidural. It seemed very foreign to my worldview and my social circle. Now of course I'm tempted to look back and wish I'd done "natural" labor to see if that would have prevented my c-section but realistically, I wasn't "there" 8 years ago! Does that make sense?

Makes total sense to me. I think a lot of how you approach labor and plan your "ideal" birth has to do with the outside influences you are exposed to. I'm in an area where trying to go natural is pretty common, in fact there were 2 couples in our birth class of ~10 couples planning to do home births. But in other areas its way more common to go in and get an epidural right at the start.

Because of those influences I read up more on natural techniques and prepared myself for that. However I wasn't wedded to a specific plan and when things weren't moving along (the back labor was making me tense up and I wasn't dilating) I knew I needed to try medication w/o regret. I don't regret getting an epidural bc it was my choice and I know it was necessary given the situation. I do wish I hadn't had cytotech to help me dilate bc that was suggested by the Dr's and I later learned it can have side effects on the baby's nursing, which I believe was related to DS not figuring out how to latch on for 5 weeks.

I think the bottom line is that regardless of what everyone else is doing, and even what your doctors are saying, you need to be educated on the various possibilities and willing to adjust to what mother nature gives you.

[bisous]

I think the bottom line is that regardless of what everyone else is doing, and even what your doctors are saying, you need to be educated on the various possibilities and willing to adjust to what mother nature gives you.

I think that is a great takeaway. Ironically, the same circle that is so pro-induction/pro-epidural is also very pro-breastfeeding. It really DID help when breastfeeding proved difficult with DS1 that EVERYONE around me was doing it. It was much harder to fall back on formula. I appreciate these kinds of threads because I feel like it gives us choices and power!

[SnuggleBuggles]

My friend ended up with a c-section for her posterior, 8lb baby this past winter. She was really asking me if there was something she could have done to prevent it. When I found she had an epidural I thought that could be it but she had an awesome epidural and/ or amazing mind over body. She had no epidural for the 1st 24 hours. Then spent labor and delivery up and moving and changing positions. Hands and knees, on the ball...and her little guy just was stubbornly in such a way that she couldn't get him down and out after 2 hours of pushing. They offered to let her go as long as she wanted, which is just amazing nowadays! sometimes it just happens. Sometimes there are a lot of tools in the toolbox that aren't brought out.

Beth

[bisous]

Beth, thanks for sharing that. It is good to remember that sometimes it just happens--despite our best intentions and even sometimes despite the best current knowledge!

[MSWR0319]

I understand that! Just curious about the position (anterior, posterior...) of your first and whether they checked on that/ will check on that this time? That was my big question with ds2 bc ds1 was posterior and that brought on extra challenges.

Beth

Just curious, was DS2 posterior? My DS was and I really don't want to relive 40+ hours of labor again if possible. I've heard though that there's a higher risk of a repeat posterior baby.

[BayGirl2]

Just curious, was DS2 posterior? My DS was and I really don't want to relive 40+ hours of labor again if possible. I've heard though that there's a higher risk of a repeat posterior baby.

Same here. My Doula did mention that sitting in a very reclined position can make the baby roll so their heaviest parts (back of head) are on the bottom. She said that when looking at this loungy chair I have in my bedroom. That makes sense bc I spent a lot of time sitting like that on the couch before I went into labor with DS. Now if I sit semi-reclined I can feel DD moving around a bit. This time I am trying to either lay down or sit up. If I recline for a while I try to get on my hands and knees or lean forward over a counter to feel if she slides back around.

Anyone else hear of this? Maybe its not true, but I'm willing to do what it takes to avoid back labor this time.

[SnuggleBuggles]

Ds2 was not posterior- it was something I worried about a lot and my midwives understood. The one midwife told me to stay off the couch and sit in a birthing ball instead. Sitting like the Thinking Man (whatever it's official name is) statue is very helpful too.

Beth

[BayGirl2]

Ds2 was not posterior- it was something I worried about a lot and my midwives understood. The one midwife told me to stay off the couch and sit in a birthing ball instead. Sitting like the Thinking Man (whatever it's official name is) statue is very helpful too.

Beth

Good to hear, sounds similar to what my doula said. I just find it so uncomfortable to lean forward. Even in the first trimester I feel all squished in my lower stomach area. But I am working on it, trying to keep the baby facing back.

Oh, its "The Thinker" :-)

[daisymommy]

Fwiw...my baby #1 was posterior, and had a hand up balled in a fist, held to the top of his head. Lots of fun ;) I held out out till 9.5 cm. without drugs, then caved for an epidural when an intense pain hit me. Now I know it was him getting ready to crown, and if someone had checked me first, I could have been pushing. He came out drugged up, poor guy.

Baby #2 I was on the birthing ball from start to finish, and my labor was only 3 hours, baby was anterior.

Baby #3 I was on all 4's and squatting alot, baby was anterior, labor was 5 hours.

[SnuggleBuggles]

Good to hear, sounds similar to what my doula said. I just find it so uncomfortable to lean forward. Even in the first trimester I feel all squished in my lower stomach area. But I am working on it, trying to keep the baby facing back.

Oh, its "The Thinker" :-)

Yeah, your belly is supposed to hang down between your knees. Slightly more comfortable. :)

Ah, The Thinker! Thanks!

Beth