What is going on with these marathon length births??

[CuttySark]

I had stallouts/ pitocin/ epidurals with both of mine (both about 20 hours, with epidurals at the 9 hr and 6 hr marks, respectively). It slowed my labour both times (did you know dilation can actually regress after water is manually broken? I was SEVERELY unimpressed.) 

I didn't end up with the headache, thank goodness, but I did end up with an oval numb patch about 9" x 3" on the front of my thigh that took about two years to mostly clear - and that's still 'different' feeling nine years later. When the anesthetist says 'oops',  it can be an issue.  

That being said, kids are both perfect, and if (Gd forbid) I ever got pregnant again, I would go for the epidural again as well.

All that to say, it has to be up to the individual to decide for herself, because it is so necessary for some of us, but absolutely not risk-free. 

[JermajestyDuggar]

My personal theory:

Quiverfull fundies avoid c section like the plague because you can only have so many c sections. So if they are planning on having a dozen kids, it's best to have the least amount of c sections possible. So these fundies wait and wait and wait in hopes that they can deliver vaginally until the dr basically says you can't wait any longer and they do a c section. 

[kpmom]

14 hours ago, picklepizzas said:

Kennedy Morton just had her first baby...after 62 hours of labor (followed of course by medical intervention). What is going on with this crazy pattern for first time births with the fundies lately? When I read about Jill's labor I was shocked; I was dumbfounded to see Jessa follow in her footsteps a few months later. And now this?! (Wasnt Katie Mortons first labor also ridiculously long?) so to those who have had babies...is this in any way normal? Or safe? I'm having a hard time believing any midwife or Doctor would condone two-day-plus labors!

 

Is that Mrs. 62 hours?  Dang, she sure looks good for that long a labor.

Me?  I'm all for drugs and any medical intervention I can get!

[PsyD2013]

Two births with epidurals.  Slept through both labors.  Woke up when I felt the urge to push- 45 mn for baby # 1, baby # 2 was out in under 10 mn.  I had birth plans for both.  Baby 1 had a fatal chromosomal defect.  I elected not to have a c-section to make my recovery time shorter so I could take care of her if she made it through birth.  My recovery for both births was very quick because I was well rested and didn't have a quiver of littles at home.  I cannot imagine a 60 hour labor.  I think I would have been begging for a c-secton and then closing my womb forever.   

[fundiefan]

2 hours ago, SolomonFundy said:

Long labors aren't uncommon at all, and in the case of first-time mothers, they can go even longer. You may have a case of observational bias. That, and people tend to comment on unusually long or fast births when posting about a new baby, but don't specify when the labor was "normal" by their standards. There are a lot of birth announcements and stories that don't include delivery time details, or where the only remarks amount to "things went smoothly", which could mean just about anything. 

I think that some women (in and out of fundy circles) participate in a certain degree of bragging about the length of time spent in labor. Since suffering is biblically encouraged, a long and painful labor is seen as a sign of Godliness.

In Kennedy's case, my heart broke a little. She announced her pregnancy something like 52 days after their wedding, and registered for a book set titled "How to Make A Baby", or something similar. Her innocence and naivety on what pregnancy and childbirth really meant was probably shattered yesterday. The comment on instagram about her emotional and physical exhaustion was telling.  Katie's first birth was probably even more traumatic, and the most she ever said about it (in the infamous post-birth video) was that she just did what God designed her to do.  I have to say, I'm extremely happy to see that so many of the women in the family have posted comments about how proud they are of her, and how brave she is. Not a back-handed remark about "real" childbirth anywhere. 

Within her world, yes, she has been an extremely brave woman. However - and I don't say this to demean or downplay what she went through - she was set up to be brave. She was raised at least on the fringes of Morton thinking; then she married a Morton. From day one, as you said, she was planning to have the babies. She played by all the rules and did her duty with impressive speed and efficiency. Even with all that, the fact that she endured 62 hours before the c-section makes her a super-woman. However, I can't help but wonder how many MEN, and Morton men (and those who think like Morton men), had a hand in the length of her labor. Which man finally gave the "ok" for hospital/c-section? Which man decided at say 36 hours that continuing was the right thing to do? Or at 48 hours?

The part about her labor & birth that makes me sad is the fact that I know she most likely had little say in any of it. Her religion, her dogma, the men in her family - from birth and marriage - no doubt dictated what was done when, where and how. We KNOW that's what Mortons do and we know the Morton men are conditioned for their all powerful roles, even in their wives childbirth.

It is entirely possible that she just didn't progress or something and decided on the c-section. And there is nothing wrong with going into it with your own goals and lines in the sand and 'break points'. Nothing wrong with not wanting a c-section and doing all you can to prevent it. 

The entire problem, and my whole opinion, arise because she lives in Morton-land and I don't really think any of it was up to her. And I give zero 'credit' to whichever Morton man finally got the right word from his god to give the OK for his wife to have a c-section and just get the baby born safely and end his wife's misery. If said Morton had any true concern about the baby or the mother, he'd have left it up to her from the get go. 

In Morton land, women have zero autonomy over their lives or bodies, and I don't believe Kennedy is any exception. 

That makes me both sad and fucking angry. 

I am, however, very glad, given the circumstances & environment, that both mother & baby are apparently well. 

[gustava]

12 minutes ago, kpmom said:

Is that Mrs. 62 hours?  Dang, she sure looks good for that long a labor.

Me?  I'm all for drugs and any medical intervention I can get!

I think she looks exhausted.....and relieved.  I notice her fingernails are bitten down to the quick.

[desertvixen]

@LittleSpouseOnThePrairie, FWIW I expected to have an epidural and did not.  Having gone without (they did give me a shot of something to take the edge off while waiting for my epidural), I would do so in the future.

However, I was in active labor for about 6 hours and I had nurses that would let me switch positions (because back labor is the worst pain known to woman).

I will say that it wasn't as bad, pain-wise, as I feared it would be.

[ADoyle90815]

31 minutes ago, JermajestyDuggar said:

My personal theory:

Quiverfull fundies avoid c section like the plague because you can only have so many c sections. So if they are planning on having a dozen kids, it's best to have the least amount of c sections possible. So these fundies wait and wait and wait in hopes that they can deliver vaginally until the dr basically says you can't wait any longer and they do a c section. 

That's also what I think, they want to avoid c sections as often as possible because they want to have as many children as possible. I think it's a reason why fundies sometimes favor home births with a midwife than hospital births, especially when labor is often longest for first time mothers.

[desertvixen]

That, and labor gets cheaper if you don't have any of the "extras"...

[Manda]

In both Jill's and Jessa's cases based on what we knew of them, they seemed to exaggerate their length of labor by quite a bit.  It seems that they think it makes for a better or more dramatic story.  My mom says when she was pregnant, women seemed to be more in a race to claim the shortest labor possible.  Jill seemed to imply her labor began when her water broke which is not how it's calculated at the hospital.  

[fundiefan]

21 minutes ago, Manda said:

In both Jill's and Jessa's cases based on what we knew of them, they seemed to exaggerate their length of labor by quite a bit.  It seems that they think it makes for a better or more dramatic story.  My mom says when she was pregnant, women seemed to be more in a race to claim the shortest labor possible.  Jill seemed to imply her labor began when her water broke which is not how it's calculated at the hospital.  

Absolutely. Not that there weren't "issues" but I don't doubt for a second that there was a heap of exaggeration. Every move they make, everything they do, is to make money. People, TLC, their leg humpers...

That, to me, is the worst part about them. None of them is actually a human living human life; they are all, every one of them, living for the royalties, media checks, and attention. 

That's even more pathetic than their Gothard programmed lives. 

[darkplumaged]

5 hours ago, LittleSpouseOnThePrairie said:

I am having a baby at the end of October, and still really struggling on epidural or not. I'm not afraid of needles or anything regarding that, but my biggest fear is it slowing down my labor, and also the horrific headache it can cause. I hate headaches so I'd rather do labor without pain management than push with a splitting headache that can potentially last a couple days. Has anyone else heard about the epidural headache? Maybe I'm overly paranoid?

I'm expecting #2 at the end of October!

I've heard about epidural headaches, but I have no idea how common they are. I didn't get one--the headache, that is. I can't say there was any downside to my getting an epidural. I was able to rest for hours before it was time to start pushing... not comfortably, mind you, because I was hooked up to a fetal monitor, IV, etc., but at least I wasn't in pain.

Active labor lasted 14-15 hours for me, which I think is normal for a first birth. About 5 of those hours were pre-epidural.

[Florita]

11 hours ago, LittleSpouseOnThePrairie said:

I am having a baby at the end of October, and still really struggling on epidural or not. I'm not afraid of needles or anything regarding that, but my biggest fear is it slowing down my labor, and also the horrific headache it can cause. I hate headaches so I'd rather do labor without pain management than push with a splitting headache that can potentially last a couple days. Has anyone else heard about the epidural headache? Maybe I'm overly paranoid?

I had an epidural for my 4th (last) labor/delivery. I had to be induced with pitocin and was not handling the contractions well. Once the pain eased off, my daughter was delivered quickly. I think the epidural allowed me to relax, dilate, and to push more effectively. 

I did not experience a headache. The biggest downside to the epidural, for me, was that I was stuck in bed for several hours after her birth. My daughter was premature and whisked off to NICU and I was stuck in bed with numb legs. :-(  

[lawfulevil]

It's normal, from what I've heard. My cousin took awhile (a little over 2 days) and my aunt still went to work/class until it got serious. More worrying for first babies is when it goes fast- my mother tore pretty badly.

She said it was a pretty terrifying experience, especially since my cousin is a couple years older than I am and she was expecting something very different.

[JermajestyDuggar]

7 hours ago, lawfulevil said:

It's normal, from what I've heard. My cousin took awhile (a little over 2 days) and my aunt still went to work/class until it got serious. More worrying for first babies is when it goes fast- my mother tore pretty badly.

She said it was a pretty terrifying experience, especially since my cousin is a couple years older than I am and she was expecting something very different.

Extremely fast labors are terrifying and much more painful. I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy. 

[Coconut Flan]

1 hour ago, JermajestyDuggar said:

Extremely fast labors are terrifying and much more painful. I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy. 

Not always.  My grandmother had fast labors so I halfway expected that I might.  My longest labor was four hours.  One was less than two hours and I only had one really painful contraction.  Like most things it can be extremely variable.  However, if I were a Duggar I'd go around saying that my first labor lasted over four weeks.  I began dilating about five weeks before the baby was born. 

[elliha]

2 hours ago, JermajestyDuggar said:

Extremely fast labors are terrifying and much more painful. I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy. 

There are these women who have silent labor though. They have contractions and everything but no pain and then just feel the urge to push and the baby comes. Some feel the last couple of contractions so they might have a labor of 15 mins before they start pushing and the baby comes. It is probably scary to just have the baby come but not very painful. I read a blog by a woman who had this. The first baby took 35 mins to push out and she made it to the hospital. The second one was induced to be sure to be at the hospital. The induction took 2 hours and was painful but fast. The third one came 7 mins after she felt the urge to push two days before the scheduled induction. She had that child at home, the ambulance took about 20 mins to come but everything was fine. Her sister has the same thing but does feel a slight pain to the cervix when in labor so she has made it to the hospital both her births. 

[Coconut Flan]

That's my grandma, my aunt, and me.  The first baby they watched closely since they knew I was slowly dilating.  Fortunately for me, a nurse told me to keep a hand over my uterus and time the contractions that way.  Other doctors kept a close watch in following pregnancies and I timed the contractions by hand.  All of my babies were delivered in the hospital.  They usually timed my labor from the time a nurse at the hospital registered a contraction. My grandmother had all of hers at home.  My aunt had one in the hospital and one in either the parking lot or the ER entry area. 

[slickcat79]

21 hours ago, JermajestyDuggar said:

My personal theory:

Quiverfull fundies avoid c section like the plague because you can only have so many c sections. So if they are planning on having a dozen kids, it's best to have the least amount of c sections possible. So these fundies wait and wait and wait in hopes that they can deliver vaginally until the dr basically says you can't wait any longer and they do a c section. 

Of course, some of them just completely ignore medical advice in that regard. And advise others to do the same.

Quote

I labored for 12 hours and never progressed passed a fingertip. Her heart rate was dropping and my doctor suggested a c-section. At 22 I was young and uneducated about medical practices and agreed to go ahead.

She seems regretful about having a c-section, even though her baby's heart rate was dropping.

Quote

When I delivered my fourth child, the doctor nicked him in the head with the scalpel during the delivery. He was shocked at how thin it was. He said it was like a piece of saran wrap over the baby.

Yeah...

http://aboverubies.org/index.php/2013-11-12-17-55-51/english-language/c-sections/1031-c-sections-how-many-is-too-many

[December]

23 hours ago, SolomonFundy said:

I think that some women (in and out of fundy circles) participate in a certain degree of bragging about the length of time spent in labor. Since suffering is biblically encouraged, a long and painful labor is seen as a sign of Godliness.

Agreed. If they believe their entire purpose on this planet is to have babies (and lots and lots of them), it makes sense they would want to emphasize the amount of work/effort that went into giving birth to the children. 

Also, with the emphasis on leaving the family size up to God, I think letting their labor be (potentially unnecessarily) long and painful might be more evidence that they truly are leaving it up to God. Which would also explain why they had to wait for the husband to be moved by God to go to a hospital for intervention, etc. 

[Black Aliss]

23 hours ago, LittleSpouseOnThePrairie said:

I am having a baby at the end of October, and still really struggling on epidural or not. I'm not afraid of needles or anything regarding that, but my biggest fear is it slowing down my labor, and also the horrific headache it can cause. I hate headaches so I'd rather do labor without pain management than push with a splitting headache that can potentially last a couple days. Has anyone else heard about the epidural headache? Maybe I'm overly paranoid?

Speaking as one who has had two "natural" births, both of which were too short and intense to even consider medication, get the epidural if it turns out you want it. There are plenty of headaches ahead, regardless of how you give birth.

Oh, look here! Someone in the New York Times Sunday Review section agrees with me!

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/10/opinion/sunday/get-the-epidural.html?src=me&ref=general

[Anonymousguest]

1 hour ago, elliha said:

There are these women who have silent labor though. They have contractions and everything but no pain and then just feel the urge to push and the baby comes. Some feel the last couple of contractions so they might have a labor of 15 mins before they start pushing and the baby comes. It is probably scary to just have the baby come but not very painful. I read a blog by a woman who had this. The first baby took 35 mins to push out and she made it to the hospital. The second one was induced to be sure to be at the hospital. The induction took 2 hours and was painful but fast. The third one came 7 mins after she felt the urge to push two days before the scheduled induction. She had that child at home, the ambulance took about 20 mins to come but everything was fine. Her sister has the same thing but does feel a slight pain to the cervix when in labor so she has made it to the hospital both her births. 

I have a friend who is like this too, with 3 precipitous labors. The first one (which was her second birth) she had alone at home. She had lots of pre labor too, so basically every time she had a contraction she and her husband rushed to the hospital with the next two. They were painful though, and terrifying for her. I've known others who have had very fast labors and they don't really think of them any more favorably than those with long labors. It's an event any way you go through child birth, lol. 

[SilverBeach]

On 7/10/2016 at 1:03 AM, Anonymousguest said:

It's normal, and safe. Many hospital inductions take 2 days, I was in induced labor with my first for 50 some hours, ending in c/s. Pre, or prodromal labor can last for days. Many women start counting"labor" when they have the first contraction, but it's often not active labor yet. True active labor for days could be stressful for both mom and baby, and most Dr's wouldn't let it go that long if there was no progress. 

 

On 7/10/2016 at 4:44 AM, akinom said:

Yeah, the first stages of labour can last for days. There are limits to how long you should wait after the water breaks, but if the baby is monitored even active labour can be allowed to last surprisingly long.

My labor was 36 hours total, and I was eventually induced with a resulting vaginal birth. I had no water break, DD was 17 days past her due date and all the amniotic fluid was gone. So there was a higher risk of infection and it would have been a c-section if she had not eventually popped out. I had a late stage epidural of little to no efficacy while giving me every side effect in the book. I was miserable during it all, but the baby was fine by all monitoring indicators, so I was allowed to keep suffering. DD has been the joy of my life, but there is a reason that she is my one and only.

[polecat]

re: epidural headaches

I have a close friend who has had two epis (several children), and both times, she has had epidural headaches. She opted out of future epidurals. I've had three epidurals (and one spinal for a miscarriage/d&c) and am a chronic migraineur and have never had an epidural headache. I think it's just one of those things. 

I had c-sections, so epidurals weren't exactly optional for me. With my first, I did NOT want one. I was pretty adamant. I was induced with pitocin at 37 or so weeks, though, due to pre-eclampsia. My labor progressed pretty quickly. Doc broke my water a cm or two into it, and it went even faster from there. Contractions were hard and fast almost immediately. My blood pressure, which was already really high, went even higher. They had me on a mag drip and other meds, but it wasn't helping much. Finally, the doc told me I really needed the epi for my BP if nothing else. The pain -- it was real. I know people say you forget, but I won't forget it. But as painful as it was, it was also something that was manageable. A productive sort of pain. You know like when you have really sore muscles and you stretch them -- it hurts, but you know stretching will make it better? That kind of thing.  (No, the pain isn't comparable to that -- just that kind of productive pain). So as much as it hurt, I could have handled it. BUT the epidural made it so much easier. Once the epi was in place, I was able to rest, and my BP dropped dramatically.  I felt re-energized. I'm not sure that I would have been able to push as long as I did had I not had the epi in place. (Although it didn't matter since I still ended up with a section anyway, lol). 

So, bottom line: An epi can be a wonderful way to manage pain and make the laboring process easier on you. Labor can be utterly exhausting and make you too worn out to really enjoy the birthing process and baby. It can also make you too worn out to push effectively. Do your research, and take advantage of the tools that are available to you and that you think will most benefit you. 

[justwatching]

My first two labors came on stealthily so I have no idea how long they lasted.  I asked for epidurals when I got a point where I felt I couldn't handle the contractions any longer. 

My third was a scheduled C-section due to breech presentation, but she turned at the last minute (as in when they were getting ready to prep me).  The Dr. cancelled the section and gave me the option of going home for a week, or trying to induce.  She said it would be rough and long because there was nothing going on down below.  I opted for the induction and they gave me the epi at around 2cm (no need to be a hero this time lol).  I went from 2 to 8 in about half an hour.  Since that went so fast and I had a previous tear, the dr turned down the pit and just let me labor her down for a couple of hours.  Her birth was right at 6 hrs from hookup to out.

I did not have headaches with any of them, and my 3rd one had to stay in place for several more hours as I waited for an OR to be available for a tubal.