Midwifery Today Community

A home for friends of birth
Attend the Midwifery Today conference in Australia

Transverse twice?

Last post 07-14-2009 9:30 AM by mybodymyself. 13 replies.
Page 1 of 1 (14 items)
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  • 05-21-2009 2:15 PM

    Transverse twice?

    I have a friend that is 36 weeks with her second child and yesterday was told she would have to schedule a c-section due to this baby being transverse. Her first child was transverse as well and had to have a c-section with that baby also. She has been going to the same OB & they do not do any manual exam to feel the position of the baby (I asked her) is this normal? What are the odds of 2 babies being transverse? Would pelvic shape have any bearing on this? Also, my friend is extremely disappointed & was really looking forward to doing a VBAC. Any advice would be helpful.

    Doula in training

  • 05-21-2009 9:46 PM In reply to

    Re: Transverse twice?

     36 wks is early to decide to section for funky lie.  The baby can do double back flips from time to time while you watch!  Suggest she go to the web site spinninbabies.  much info on how to tell where the baby is and how to get them to move.  I hope you can get her to get some starch in her backbone and tell them NO!  She is being bullied.  A repeat surgical birth is much more risky that a VBAC.  Go to a chiropractor and ask they do the Webster technique to position baby. 


    Women and cats will do as they please and men and dogs should relax and get used to the idea. - Robert A Heinlein
  • 05-22-2009 4:49 AM In reply to

    Re: Transverse twice?

    So if the doc isn't palpating, he's going by ultrasound?  His hands aren't broke enough to hold the device? (I'm assuming his hands are broke because he doesn't palpate.)  Devil  36 weeks is an interesting time to start talking scheduled cesarean, isn't it?  It would be interesting to know what he's got planned 4 weeks from now: vacation? golf trip?  Oh, I know!  He's getting his hands fixed.  Sorry.  I'm very evil this AM.  Although there are funky-shaped uteruses (here we go again--uteri?) which can cause a baby to lie sideways, that's rare.  I'd get my pregnant butt out of that practice if I were in that position (so to speak).  It's never too late to get another care provider.  It's uncomfortable and icky and it involves paperwork and people get cranky and grumpy but it sure beats a second possibily unnecessary surgery.  Can she get a second opinion?


    I get up every morning determined to both change the world and have one hell of a good time. Sometimes this makes planning my day difficult. --E.B. White
  • 05-22-2009 5:58 AM In reply to

    Re: Transverse twice?

    Ha HA!


    I agree completely....I think he is going on vacation.

    A second opinion would be worth all the hassel in the world.

    One of my peeves, are Dr.'s that SAY they are supportive of VBAC but meanwhile inflict and inject fear and doubt.


  • 05-22-2009 6:09 AM In reply to

    Re: Transverse twice?

     I, too, am disgusted with this lack of palpating baby's position during routine prenatal visits.  This part of the visit is so exciting to most women (which is so important), and second, is important to intervene if the position is a problem, while there is still time to do something.  And, yes, it can happen twice.  I have a woman who had a transverse baby with all three of her pregnancies at some point later in gestation.  With this last one, I waited as long as I could, then at 37 weeks decided to turn the baby.  Mom said it stayed that way a full 4 hours, then turned again.  It turned twice in early labor as well.  Thankfully, by birth it decided to be head-down.  Maybe your friend could find a nice midwife who would turn her baby.  I had an interesting story.  One of my patients had to transfer to MD care with her last baby because she had blood clots in both her lungs at 10 weeks gestation and needed blood thinners throughout pregnancy.  At 36 wks, (by ultrasound), baby was breech and MD scheduled a c/s.  She called an asked me to come turn it.  Very nerve-wracking, because of the blood-thinners and the known risk of possible placental detachment with turning a baby.  It turned successfully.  At the next visit, the doctor started out by saying, "Yes, it's still breech; no...wait a minute, I think it's head down."  He was obviously shocked.  Ordered another ultrasound and baby's head down!  Schedules an induction (can't remember the bogus reason he used) and she had a nice labor.  At noon she's 5 cm and he say's, "I'll break your water now."  She says, "Don't go far, I go fast when my water breaks."  I guess he thought that meant, "Good, I have time for lunch."  Another doctor had to rush to her room 15 minutes later to deliver the baby because the doctor was at lunch.  It amazes me how some docs just never listen to women.

  • 05-24-2009 3:43 AM In reply to

    Re: Transverse twice?

    My XMIL had 2 transverse babies.  Both my BIL's lay that way (in fact she didn't know she was expecting XP, her first baby, until she was past 6 months because she was chunky in the midsection and i suspect he too was lying that way most of the time).  With #2 he was manually turned by the doctor at 37weeks and turned back on the bus as she was going home.  She cried for 3 hours.  In those days they worried about lie AT labour and not before, and the doc basically said they'd be cautious when labour began to check the position.  In the event she gave birth in the hospital corridor (which is pretty good for her - she had XP on her mum's new white sofa because she didn't realise the niggle in her side and need to poo was actually the 1st and 2nd stage of labour....) clearly he'd turned head down right before labour began.  Her #3 was also a stubborn transverse but she didn't worry that time and he too went head down for labour (which she said was hard, "I had to PUSH!" were her words.  LOL, what a woman!).

    Bottom line: lie cannot be determined without examination by hands or ultrasound.  She is being bullied into unnecessary surgery.  She needs to drop the ob and hotfoot to a good mdwife if at all possible and a decent ob if not.

    Me 32, DH 41, DD 2006, DD 2010, DS 2013
  • 05-24-2009 9:22 PM In reply to

    Re: Transverse twice?

    I agree with the PPs and LOL @ brinbabies :)

    I would recommend checking out the spinning babies site and finding another HCP, or at least a 2nd opinion.

    Jesus was born unassisted!
  • 06-12-2009 8:35 AM In reply to

    Re: Transverse twice?

     I just wanted to give an update & ask a question. My friend had her section on Monday & the baby was so stuck they had to use a kiwi suction to get him out & he had the most horrible bruising on his face & head that I have ever seen. He also had a "true knot" in his umbilical cord. Just starting into this field & not being too sure of certain medical lingo I wasn't sure if the Ob was being inept, feeding us a line or this truly was a good candidate for this suction thing. BTW the baby was only 7 bls 11 oz & 21-1/2 inches long. Also, what is a true knot & is that another good reason for a section? My friend was told that it was a very good reason.


  • 06-12-2009 12:19 PM In reply to

    Re: Transverse twice?

    [I'm going to start another thread concerning knots so that our other members can give their opinions and tell their stories. --Brlnbabies, Moderator]

    Wow!  That sounds pretty traumatic for all involved including you! Were you there or did you just get to see the baby afterwards? Knots don't usually cause problems but they sometimes can.  It sounds like baby was pretty stuck in there if they had to use a vacuum to get him out.  Yikes! Ick!  If the knot was causing a problem like severe decels in the fetal heart rate, then yes, that's a great reason for a section. However, they wouldn't be able to tell that it was a knot until they actually saw it.  They could suspect a cord problem, but they wouldn't know it until they saw the knot.  Here's what Varney's Midwifery has to say about knots: "Ture knotting must be differentiated from false knotting.  False knotting of the cord occurs when the cord appears to be knotted but instead the blood vessels within the cord are kinked.  A true knot occurs when the fetus has passed through a loop in the cord and a real knot has been created [then they show a picture].  True knotting is most likely to occur in one of two situations: a.  small fetus, long cord, and large amount of amniotic fluid.  The higher ratio of amniotic fluid to fetal size in early pregnancy makes this the time of greatest incidence.  True knots, although usually benign because the pulsations in the blood vessels may keep the knot from tightening, may be the cause of intrauterine death. [This is where most conventional care providers totally flip out when they see a knot.  They immediately think every knot causes death. See my story below.]  b.  multiple gestation within a single amnion.  All sorts of cord entanglements and knots are possible because the fetuses have greater freedom of movement within the fetal sac, thereby increasing both the chance of a knot's forming and the chance of its tightening.  Mortality rate is high."

    Now, here's what Harry Oxorn has to say: "Occasionally a true knot of the umbilical cord is noted after delivery.  This complication can occur when there is a long cord, large amounts of amniotic fluid, a small infant, monoamniotic twins, or an overactive fetus or as a result of external version.  In many instances, the knot is formed when a loop of cord is slipped over the infant's head or shoulders during delivery.  Rarely is the knot pulled tight enough to cause the death of the fetus from restriction of the circulation in the cord.  The umbilical vessels, protected by the thick myxomatous Wharton jelly, are rarely occluded completely.  The fetal mortality associated with true knots of the umbilical cord is low.  In these cases there is flattening or dissipation of Wharton jelly and venous congestion distal to the knot, as well as partially or completely occlusive vascular thrombi."

    Did the doc say that he knew there was a true knot before he did the section?

    I've been to several births where a true knot has been found in the cord and there's been no problem whatsoever.  I was at one hospital birth and the nurse just about passed out when she saw the knot in the cord and she went on and on about how the woman was "so lucky" and "your baby really shouldn't be here" and on and on until the doc finally said, "You know, knots happen.  Get over it.  He's fine."

    Was your friend's baby still transverse?  Was this a scheduled cesarean or did she labor?


    I get up every morning determined to both change the world and have one hell of a good time. Sometimes this makes planning my day difficult. --E.B. White
  • 06-12-2009 1:35 PM In reply to

    • midwifea
    • Top 10 Contributor
    • Joined on 02-12-2009
    • Kailua Kona, HI
    • Posts 475

    Re: Transverse twice?


    I just want to clarify, when you say he was stuck, you mean in a vertex (head down) position, correct?


    "The Voice

    There is a voice inside of you
    That whispers all day long,
    "I feel this is right for me,
    I know that this is wrong."
    No teacher, preacher, parent, friend
    Or wise man can decide
    What's right for you--just listen to
    The voice that speaks inside."
    — Shel Silverstein
  • 07-08-2009 10:04 PM In reply to

    Re: Transverse twice?

      I know, this is after the fact, sorry i didn't see this post sooner! 1st thing I'd do is go to a trusted Chiropractor for a pelvic adjustment. that usually works, taking homeopathic Pulsatilla also helps.

      One of my dd's babies was transverse, the doc just reached up, grabbed his ankles and pulled him out feet first no  surgery, not even any pain meds!

  • 07-14-2009 3:56 AM In reply to

    Re: Transverse twice?

    Why did he have to use suction to get out a baby who was unengaged?  My cousin (a paed) tells me that usually in a trnasverse secton the doctor makes the incision, reaches in to find the feet and delivers the baby feet first.  I would be interested to know why suction was required to deliver a transverse baby's head, and i will admit that i strongly suspect the head was probably wedged in the pelvis.

    Me 32, DH 41, DD 2006, DD 2010, DS 2013
  • 07-14-2009 9:30 AM In reply to

    Re: Transverse twice?


    Have no clue and really have not that much info on this.  On the another hand have seen this topic for an threads in the past, but at the same time have forgotten what were my responses to them.

    Highly recommend that you tell her to check out MT and its forums.  At same time do recommend that you tell her to check out Our Bodies, Ourselves, The Boston Women's Health Book Collective and their companion website/blog as well.  Found its really helpful no matter what.  At same time do recommend to tell her to do additional learning and research besides the books and website I give you to give you for her.   For more info on this.

    Hope my recommendations do help her.

    Good luck and etc.

Page 1 of 1 (14 items)
Subscribe to Midwifery Today magazine
Contact UsTerms of UsePrivacy PolicyAbout Us
© 2014 Midwifery Today, Inc.