Re: Pelvis too small to deliver vaginally?? (RE: DH's cousin)

Re: Pelvis too small to deliver vaginally?? (RE: DH's cousin)

Posted by wannabemom

I studied human osteology way back when, and can tell you I was stunned at the variability in size and structure of the human skeleton. Getting a baby's head through a birth canal is a tight squeaze when you're tall with broad hips like me... and it most definitely is impossible for some women becuase their pelvic bones have a slightly narrower angle than others, producing a slightly narrower space for the baby to exit.

I can imagine it is fairly straight forward to measure that opening with a sonogram.... I bet there's a cut-off on what minimum size is considered safe to try a vag delivery.

While the human female is designed to give birth vaginally, one can't forget that on the evolutionary spectrum, we're a very new species, and as such, are still evolving. We're not like horseshoe crabs... around for 200 million years and almost perfectly adapted to their environment. Just 1 million years ago, our brains (and therefore our skulls) were much smaller (about 60% of what they are now)... so it's easy to see how our pelvises haven't caught up to our baby head sizes

And on that note, I promise not to post anything else scientific for the rest of the day! I'll spare everyone from the boring long posts

Re: Pelvis too small to deliver vaginally?? (RE: DH's cousin)

Posted by eroxgirl

Posted by wannabemom

I studied human osteology way back when, and can tell you I was stunned at the variability in size and structure of the human skeleton. Getting a baby's head through a birth canal is a tight squeaze when you're tall with broad hips like me... and it most definitely is impossible for some women becuase their pelvic bones have a slightly narrower angle than others, producing a slightly narrower space for the baby to exit.

I can imagine it is fairly straight forward to measure that opening with a sonogram.... I bet there's a cut-off on what minimum size is considered safe to try a vag delivery.

While the human female is designed to give birth vaginally, one can't forget that on the evolutionary spectrum, we're a very new species, and as such, are still evolving. We're not like horseshoe crabs... around for 200 million years and almost perfectly adapted to their environment. Just 1 million years ago, our brains (and therefore our skulls) were much smaller (about 60% of what they are now)... so it's easy to see how our pelvises haven't caught up to our baby head sizes

And on that note, I promise not to post anything else scientific for the rest of the day! I'll spare everyone from the boring long posts

Actually I found that very interesting. But I'm a bit of a geek.

Re: Pelvis too small to deliver vaginally?? (RE: DH's cousin)

This is what I was told also and I am average sized. It was more the shape of my bones. I struggled with a decision...my dr was willing to let me try but I chose not to try. After my section he told me her head was stuck and that it "never would've happened". I was OK wqith my decision after the fact.

Re: Pelvis too small to deliver vaginally?? (RE: DH's cousin)

Re: Pelvis too small to deliver vaginally?? (RE: DH's cousin)

I agree that I woman should try and labor naturally if not at any risk. That is what I did and because of "failure to progress" I ended up with a c/s.

Now, just because I had FTP does NOT mean my pelvis was too small or that DS was too big (he WAS big, though). It all depends on the strength of contractions, how much stress DC is in, and many things. I ended up with a c/s because DS's heartrate kept dropping after 8 hours of being at 6 cm. So, he was pretty tired and I just couldn't contract strong enough for him to come out. Had nothing to do with my pelvis. Plus, he was "sunny side up" so it was all back labor and it is more difficult for babies when they are facing that direction than backward, like they should be.

Message edited 1/9/2009 8:40:38 PM.