Second Birth - was yours shorter?

Winnie1 · #1 (**permalink**) 07-05-2008, 01:30 PM

So they often say that your second is shorter, midwives I've spoken with say to expect it to be about half. I know everyone is differnet and some are mighty quick and some just as long.

Soooooo I just wanted to ask if and how much shorter your second birth was?

Also anyone experience false labour the second time round? Heard this was common for second timers too....

Marmee · #2 (**permalink**) 07-05-2008, 01:45 PM

Our second birth didn't turn out as planned and we had an emergency c-section. No false labour second time around, but went in to labour and got to 7-8cm before c-section.

Third birth was a VBAC and super fast IMHO

No false labour but well over a week of warm ups

SKB · #3 (**permalink**) 07-05-2008, 02:26 PM

I've heard that too, that the next birth is about half the time of the previous. Then some of these wonderfull mummies who are up to #'s 7 or 8 should be giving birth in a matter of minutes!

For me, my first was about 56 hours from 1st contraction to Amelias actual birth. The 2nd time my waters broke before contractions started & Toby was here less than 3 hours later. With Nicholas, again my waters broke before the onset of contractions, but I didn't get to hold him for another 13 hours.

I guess each birth really is individual.

Cheers
Sarah

Jakaluma · #4 (**permalink**) 07-05-2008, 03:13 PM

Well mine were very different, so not sure how much relevance the times were. First labour was waters break 4:30pm Thursday, mild contractions until about 7 or 8am the next morning, getting strong by mid morning transfer to labour ward and epidural and s---l---o---w---d---o---w---n. Pushing from 7-9 and birth at 9pm - so 12 hours of strong contractions, but the time before.

Second was an hour from first strong contraction to birth. Was at home until hour before birth, and was active with no drugs. Sure that made a massive difference in labour length.

hanabi · #5 (**permalink**) 07-05-2008, 06:13 PM

Nope, all four births were virtually identical. Maybe reduced from 7 hours active labour to 5 for the subsequent three, but around 12 hours of pre-labour contractions for each of them.

skn · #6 (**permalink**) 07-05-2008, 06:37 PM

My first (induced) was six hours. Second labour (natural) was 13 hours, but so much better!!!

skn · #7 (**permalink**) 07-05-2008, 06:41 PM

I don't really like the term 'false labour', but I did have quite a bit of pre-labour...a week before I went into labour I was having loads of BH, so many my doula hung around for half a day thinking it could possibly eventuate to labour- alas, it didn't. But for that week I would be woken at pretty much the same time (about 1am) with strong BH and that's when I ended up going into labour.

Bronnie · #8 (**permalink**) 07-05-2008, 06:54 PM

for active labour - #1 was 11 hours, #2 3 hours, #3 and #4 2 hours

Winnie1 · #9 (**permalink**) 07-05-2008, 07:58 PM

Ohh nice, thanks for the replies so far, its all really very interesting

SKB, it would be nice for mums of lots (imo more than 3

to have their bubs in a matter of minutes, but also heard (have been doing a lot of listening latley lol) that it doesn't necessarily get progressively shorter.

**Susan** · #10 (**permalink**) 07-05-2008, 08:47 PM

My first labour was about nine hours and second about eight. I wonder if having very short quick labours would actually be more shocking for everyone! I enjoy the slow build up and then the intensity of transition and climax of birth. To be any shorter for me would have been too intense and not allowed the time I need.