Interesting article about growth scans and big babies:

http://sarahockwell-smith.com/2012/11/04/big-babies-the-curse-of-mis-diagnosing-a-macrosomic-infant-part-1/

Thanks for sharing. I'm in that exact position at the moment so I've done quite a lot of research into early intervention due to size, there are lots of articles that are aimilar.
The problem is, with all of these statistics, is that there is no way of telling how all of those early inductions due to size that lead to further intervention is epidurals, instrumental delivery and c section, would have gone had they been left to go to full term/over due. Yes lots of woman birth big babies successfully

but it doesn't follow that all those that went 'wrong' would have done. Conversely of those that were left and then needed help, there is a chance they'd have birthed successfully earlier. What I mean is it's all a massive gamble!! I guess when faced with the choice, as I might be in the next couple of weeks, you can only weigh up advice from doctors and your own instincts and make a judgement on what's best for you. It is always better to be informed though that just take what you&#

Interesting article although neither of mine have been big babies

I do believe to an extent that medical intervention leads to further intervention. And the NHS is just following a big flowchart these days rather than anyone using their own judgment. I know of two people who almost had forceps deliveries following epidurals, in both cases babies were delivered successfully by the mum on her own merely by changing position, in both cases that was mum's idea rather than suggestion from the medical team. These weren't big babies but shows how NHS think. After Cs delivery I'm totally over the NHS and how they operate!

I agree weekender, there is definitely as intervention pathway. Which is what I'm really keen to avoid.
What is like to see, but can't find, is details of how successful inductions are on woman who have already given birth naturally. Ie does that make a difference compared to first time mothers in terms of how successful induction is and how much intervention/extra help is then needed.

The appointment I was summoned to on Weds was a good example of this panic around large babies. The consultant wanted to cover himself but when we got down to the stats it seems the chances of a genuine problem are very low. It got a bit farcical and although I want to be induced as soon as poss I can see that if that was not on your agenda you would really struggle with the profession.

I only know one mum induced before term who successfully birthed without further intervention. But there doesn't seem to be published stats on anything. I think if baby isn't ready to be born then forcing it out goes against nature, hence increased intervention.  I'm still angry and upset that I was under GA when C was born and it turned out to be a very straightforward section. And no one had ever suggested that it was even a possibility until the anaesthetist spoke to us an hour before going to theatre, and various professionals I've spoken to since had never heard of it before. People aren't people as far as the nhs are concerned, merely numbers.

Rant over!

Weekender I couldn't disagree more. Purely numbers? No the NHS has the interests of both mother and baby and their aim is to deliver a healthy baby without fatal risks to the mother in my opinion. However every professional has different opinions just like in any job.

I had a failed induction followed by an emcs but still believe it was in my best interests. Hospitals don't induce or perform cs's without thinking its for the best, after all it costs the NHS a lot more money and everyone knows they don't spend needlessly. Now whether that means the labour isn't what was planned or what the mother wants is neither here nor there imo.

Counter if I was in your shoes that low risk would be enough for me to fully listen to the medical professions. Why even chance a low risk when it comes to the life if your unborn?

Also that link talks about induction meaning you aren't mobile, again I couldn't disagree more. I was mobile throughout my labour including when I had a monitor strapped to me, a drip in plus an epidural! The epidural didn't even stop me going to the loo.

I can't agree that the decisions the NHS makes are always in best interests. I think bad decisions and bad outcomes happen. There used to be a policy of inducing before term, but we learnt that was wrong. Nearly every woman would undergo an episiotomy prior to delivery, but we learned that was wrong too. I would be disappointed if parents didn't have robust discussions with care providers, as although the outcome is paramount (healthy baby and mum) the journey getting there can have effects on the mum/parents for a long time after.

In terms of the risk I referred to I was cross that I was scaremongered in to an appointment with the stat of 50% yet it actually is likely to be less than 5%, in the future, not as things stand, and to avoid that risk would mean increasing risk from other options, so it's not even as straightforward as having the ability to eliminate a risk as opposed to being reckless, IYSWIM.

Well if I hadn't been induced at term I would almost certainly have ended up with a section. Even a week over I expect he'd have been over 12lb, sorry but no normal woman is built to get that out! I know some scans are inaccurate but she quotes a study that suggests 77% scan smaller than reality which doesn't really help her argument!

Whoops, read it wrong!