+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 34
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    7,027
    Thanks
    4,829
    Thanked
    4,286
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Awards:
    100 Posts in a week

    Default meconium stained liquor

    ok so this has been bothering me for a while.

    when labour with ds started, my waters broke at home on their own. I went into the hospital as instructed by the midwife on duty when I phoned as they wanted to check if there was meconium in the waters. there was, and i was told I wasn't able to go home and labour and instead had to be kept in for ctg monitoring.

    this was totally disappointing to me and upsetting when I think back to my birth experience. I've made peace with the fact I had an emergency cs but the fact that the whole labour was marred with the ctg monitoring upsets me.

    I was hoping for a water birth (in the birth pool) but was told this was not possible as my membranes had ruptured and there was a risk of infection.

    I've just read another hubber's birth diary and she's described how her waters broke yet she was able to have a water birth.

    have I been jipped? is what I was told true? or does each hospital/birthing facility have their own guidelines?

    don't get me wrong, I'm so thankful ds is here and arrived safely, but I just wonder why I was subjected to the degree of monitoring that I was and why a delivery in the birthing pool was not possible.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    2,539
    Thanks
    3,115
    Thanked
    1,828
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    From what I understand (vaguely remember antenatal class!) a water birth isn't possible with all the monitoring thingos attached, and that the monitoring is required when there is meconium in your waters as it's a sign that bub is stressed.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    3,295
    Thanks
    3,972
    Thanked
    1,027
    Reviews
    14
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    I would have thought it would have mean merconium in the waters wouls have been the risk? My waters ruptured earlier and then I still had a water birth about 30 mins later

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    3,295
    Thanks
    3,972
    Thanked
    1,027
    Reviews
    14
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    I should also say that I was in the birth centre so unless something like merconium was present or bub's hb was distressed when checked with the doppler I wouldnt be hooked up to a ctg

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    5,018
    Thanks
    972
    Thanked
    3,163
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Like the above replies I would assume it is not waters breaking - it is the meconium. So saying 'risk of infection' might not be correct. @M'LadyEm should be able to give better insight than me!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    7,027
    Thanks
    4,829
    Thanked
    4,286
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Awards:
    100 Posts in a week
    thanks ladies. I was told when waters break there's a time restriction on how long you can labour...the risk of infection is there because the waters have broken and bub is no longer in a sterile environment. although how sterile is it of bub is pooping in there!?

    ok so for those ladies whose membranes ruptured but that did go on to have a water birth, was the water checked for meconium?

    mine was checked and after it was confirmed meconium was present, I was put on ctg monitoring. bubs hb kept decelerating then fixing itself, maybe this was the reason for the continued monitoring?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    3,397
    Thanks
    736
    Thanked
    979
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    The meconium is the issue. Baby is in some sort of distress and therefore you needed monitoring.

    I had the same thing happen to me, and although I didn't want a water birth, I was told to immediately make my way to hospital and would have to labour in the delivery suite rather than in the low intervention ward.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    3,397
    Thanks
    736
    Thanked
    979
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by turquoisecoast View Post
    thanks ladies. I was told when waters break there's a time restriction on how long you can labour...the risk of infection is there because the waters have broken and bub is no longer in a sterile environment. although how sterile is it of bub is pooping in there!?

    ok so for those ladies whose membranes ruptured but that did go on to have a water birth, was the water checked for meconium?

    mine was checked and after it was confirmed meconium was present, I was put on ctg monitoring. bubs hb kept decelerating then fixing itself, maybe this was the reason for the continued monitoring?
    Hmm not sure about the time limit/sterile environment.
    My sister had her twins at 26 weeks. Her waters broke and they delayed labour for 3 days whilst they pumped the kiddies with steroids.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    7,027
    Thanks
    4,829
    Thanked
    4,286
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Awards:
    100 Posts in a week
    thanks for the replies. is meconium in the water necessarily a sign of distress though? both my sister and I have had this happen and although her labour ended in the same way as mine, her bub's hb stayed normal throughout her whole labour. I've done some reading and it says bub can do a poo in there once their digestive tract matures and so is usually seen in overdue babies. ds was born 39+5 so definitely not overdue.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    3,397
    Thanks
    736
    Thanked
    979
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    I'm interested in the replies that u get OP.

    Ds was born on his due date so he wasn't overdue either. But I thought the distress could be from anything though eg cord around neck etc.

    I'm not a midwife though so hopefully you get the answers you want 😘


 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
FEATURED SUPPORTER
Billington StreetFor stationery as unique as you are! ♥ Handmade, custom designed stationery for all of life's celebrations WINNER ...
REVIEWS
"Pigeon teats rule!"
by Alex
Pigeon PP Wide Neck reviews ›
"Wonderful natural Aussie made product!"
by Mrstwr
Baby U Goat Milk Moisturiser reviews ›
"Replaced good quality with cheap tight nappies"
by Kris
Coles Comfy Bots Nappies reviews ›