Why second opinions are good to have

Note: The following section was written on 7/18. I was too lazy to finish it that day but saved it as a draft and will follow up with more recent events after.


On Wednesday ( 7/16) Paul and I went to our OB for my weekly check-up and to discuss with her what happened at the hospital on Monday night (7/14). She didn't give us much hope that we'd be able to wait out getting a c-section, and I left still feeling disappointed in the whole process, especially since she wanted us to schedule the cesarian for next Thursday (7/24), the day before she was going on vacation. She said it was because she was afraid the cord would prolapse if I went into labor and then she wouldn't be there to do the surgery. However, it felt to me like we were at the mercy of what was convenient to her. When we got home I decided to find a midwife to get a second opinion from. I figured it was better to get a second opinion from a midwife rather than another OB because the midwife had no agenda other than giving us all sides of the issue. OB's seem to be c-section crazy these days (we can blame this on a lawsuit crazy country as well as convenience for the OB's) so all you seem to get from them are reasons why it's better to schedule the procedure asap rather than wait it out. They love to throw out fear-based information to scare you into the procedure. So we went and talked with the midwife this morning (7/18) and she explained to us that since the baby has no history of problems, I have no health problems, the baby is in a breech presentation that is not dangerous, and the placenta is in a good spot, there is no real risk to wait until going into labor before getting a c-section. This is important to me because I feel that the baby should stay in and "cook" there as long as she feels necessary (ok, within reason), and this will also give her more time to possibly turn head down, something which our OB is constantly telling us is impossible at this stage. No exceptions. Paul and I have done our research. We know that the chances of babies turning head down after 37 weeks are even slim. The odds are against us, but the odds were against us having a breech baby too (only about 3%), so I like to think maybe it's possible. I have heard lots of stories of babies turning after the mother is in labor. Perhaps if OB's weren't so quick to schedule cesarians they might find that more babies would turn? Maybe only 99.5% or 99% of babies would be breech? How will we ever know if nobody is allowed to go past 39 weeks with a breech, let alone allowed to go into labor?

7/25 Update:

We last went to our OB on the 21st and had a talk with her. The midwife we saw last week gave us a list of questions to ask her and it went pretty well. She still wanted to schedule a cesarian early but we told her we wanted to take it week to week. Apparently it can be dangerous if the baby's feet end up down instead of up (footling breech presentation) because she could stomp the cord out if the cervix is dialted. This is the one instance where the midwife suggested it might be better to go ahead and have a cesarian before going into labor first. As of our last check-up, the baby's feet were still up. She seems to be going between frank breech presentation (both feet up by the head) and complete breech presentation (feet crossed in the middle) so we're just having our OB check it out from week to week. At the moment I am wondering if this baby is ever going to come out. It seems I spent the whole pregnancy up to this point thinking she was going to come early and now that I'm a week away from the due date it seems like she will want to stay in there forever. So for those who have been asking, not much seems to be going on other than me getting larger. The Mave is still breech and I still spend most of my day emptying my bladder. Will keep y'all posted.