No naming the child Damien suggestions please.
April 10, 2006 9:17 AM   Subscribe

SuperstitiousFilter: Our Doctor wants to induce my wife to deliver our first (baby boy) on June 6th. Am I crazy or is having a baby on 06/06/06 just asking for trouble? Or will it be a fun story for my boy to tell when he gets old?

It's only 5 days early, but the baby might be too big to deliver later. We can probably hold off a few days and have the baby later, or earlier, or let him come when he wants to, Im just trying to feel how people would react to the date in general.
posted by skrike to Religion & Philosophy (47 answers total)
 
What's wrong with D-day? Just name the kid Ike.
posted by Pollomacho at 9:20 AM on April 10, 2006


Maybe this will be good for the kid - maybe it'll help him grow up knowing that superstitions are ridiculous.
posted by soplerfo at 9:23 AM on April 10, 2006


I think it'll be a good ice breaker for your kid. My phone number has 666 in it, and never fails to get a giggle from someone when I recite it. I say, go ahead and do it. It'll be a unique birthday and unless you have an actual superstitious fear of the date, then it should be okay.
posted by Zosia Blue at 9:24 AM on April 10, 2006


Given that the real number of the Beast is 616, you shouldn't have a problem.
posted by schroedinger at 9:29 AM on April 10, 2006


As the father of a New Year's Baby (2002-01-01), it's always an interesting thing to talk about.

Go for it.
posted by unixrat at 9:37 AM on April 10, 2006


You're being crazy. Your doctor is recommending a specific day because it's in the best interest of your wife and child. The fact that it's some specific Gregorian calendar number is not important. If it makes you feel better, think of 06/06/06 as Boomtime, Confusion 11, Year of Our Lady of Discord 3172.
posted by Nelson at 9:39 AM on April 10, 2006


D'oh. Forgot to mention 2002-01-01 @ 11:11a.

It's a larf.
posted by unixrat at 9:40 AM on April 10, 2006


Your doctor is recommending a specific day because it's in the best interest of your wife and child.

How can we be sure it's not because two or three other parents already turned down an appointment for that day, so that's where the schedule hole is?
posted by Miko at 9:41 AM on April 10, 2006


You live in Salt Lake City?

I would say no. There will be entirely too much hassle for the poor child.
posted by occhiblu at 9:42 AM on April 10, 2006


i'd be more worried about him liking techno.
posted by hypocritical ross at 9:42 AM on April 10, 2006


Just watch out for unexpected nannies and dogs.

Seriously, are you superstitious? No? Don't worry about it, then. Oy. Having said that, my son's birthday is 11/23/05, which is the start of the fibonacci sequence (more or less).
posted by boo_radley at 9:45 AM on April 10, 2006


It's not like you are giving your child a silly name. If he or she ends up being "embarassed" by the date of his birthday no one will know except those who take his credit card applications. Can't see it being a problem....
posted by meta x zen at 9:45 AM on April 10, 2006


Here's the thing: two, three, twenty-six years from now, nobody is going to ascribe any significance to that date. Few people ascribe significance to that date now. If it's something that bothers you, then sure, ask the doctor to change the date. It's not a big deal, though, and really does play out as a kind of silly supersition.

But, really, nobody's going to pay much attention to the date in your child's future.
posted by jdroth at 9:51 AM on April 10, 2006


How can we be sure it's not because two or three other parents already turned down an appointment for that day, so that's where the schedule hole is?

I think this is likely. I'd probably avoid the date if possible, and I'm about as non-superstitious as they come. But I wouldn't freak out if it wasn't avoidable, either.

Your doctor probably did schedule it where there was room in the schedule (which might have nothing to do with it being 6/6/06) -- when I had my C-section, the appt. scheduler started with Monday but my doctor wasn't free until Wednesday, so I guess a couple of days wouldn't make much difference, especially this far in advance.

Oh, and my original due date? 9/11. I had the same sort of feelings -- it doesn't matter/it shouldn't matter/it would be nice to have something to celebrate that day/I hope I deliver early, all at the same time.
posted by theredpen at 9:57 AM on April 10, 2006


If you move it, the kid will spend the rest of his life wishing he had been born on 6/6/6.
posted by smackfu at 9:59 AM on April 10, 2006


if everyone is avoiding 6/6/6 wouldn't that mean you'd get better attention/service?

i can't believe i'm seeing a question like this here, btw. what has america come to?
posted by andrew cooke at 10:00 AM on April 10, 2006


It's only 5 days early, but the baby might be too big to deliver later.

Yeah and monkeys might fly out of my butt. It's two months away, how does your doctor know the baby "might be too big" by that point? Will it be even be 40 weeks yet? 41? 42?

We can probably hold off a few days and have the baby later, or earlier, or let him come when he wants to

You want the best chance for the healthiest baby possible? Then let him pick his own birthday, unless you have clear evidence something is wrong with him hanging out in there.

Your doctor is recommending a specific day because it's in the best interest of your wife and child.

LOL how does a doctor get the kind of crystal ball that tells him 2 months in advance when the perfect day for a child to be born is? They schedule things for two reason: 1. convenience, 2. they have some reason (ideally involving evidence, like an ultrasound) to believe that the child is in danger in the womb or overstaying its welcome - something like a lack of amniotic fluid or something.

Birth is not an exact science. Any day from 38 weeks to 42 weeks is considered a perfectly normal, healthy day to be born on. Induction is not without its risks - pitocin can cause contractions that are more severe and powerful than regular contractions. And by that I mean more PAINFUL.

In rare cases, mother nature has something go wrong with the timing mechanism, but typically there is some sort of indication that life in the womb is becoming suboptimal for the baby (like low amniotic fluid, reduced movement, something like that). But that's quite rare.

I know, everything else in life is schedulable these days. We are used to being able to pencil stuff in our calendar, especially big important life-changing events. But this is on mother nature's clock. It's good that we have the ability to force the issue if the mother or baby look like they're in danger, but doing it just for convenience carries risks and might not be prudent.

But hey, it's your (and your wife's) birth. Do whatever you want. Just realize that the overwhelming majority of babies are perfectly capable of picking their own birthdate and having a normal, healthy birth.

And fwiw I think a birthday of 06/06/06 is cool.
posted by beth at 10:00 AM on April 10, 2006


This isn't exactly the question you asked, but: please understand that inducing labor is for your doctor's convenience, not your wife's health. Your doctor doesn't like to be up at 2AM. So your doctor is planning on forcing your wife to deliver the child on his schedule. When the doctor is planning an induction two months ahead of time, it has no conceivable relationship to medical necessity. June 6 happens to be a Tuesday; the doctor probably has a regular in-hospital schedule on Tuesdays; if you ask around, you'll probably find most of his other patients "happened" to be induced on Tuesdays too. For some reason, it's never in the best interests of the woman and child to be induced Saturday night at 8 PM, only in the morning on Tuesdays. Funny coincidence, huh.

This is, at best, *neutral* to your wife's health - it neither hurts nor harms her. However, it has a significant possibility of being negative to your wife's health. Induced births have a vastly higher rate of C-sections, so if your wife wishes to deliver vaginally, do not permit the induction.
posted by jellicle at 10:01 AM on April 10, 2006


I have had both natural and induced labor. Induced labor is harder, and less oxygen sometimes gets to the child if the contractions come too close together.If you go that route educate yourself and pay attention, especially if she plans an epidural-since she wouldn't be feeling the contractions.

Unless you have a specific medical reason to induce (and I cannot think of one this early frankly) I'd avoid it. Besides, the baby might just decide to show up earlier and make it all a moot point. (full disclosure-I gave birth naturally all three times, and baby number one was over nine pounds. I'm only five feet tall. It was a relatively easy labor.)

As to your question, I'm a Christian and I think that birthday would be hilarious. Don't worry about it.
posted by konolia at 10:16 AM on April 10, 2006


I spent a number of years with a woman who was born on 6/9/69. It was seldom if ever noticed ("June 9, 1969" being normal way people talk about this), and when it was noticed the reaction was invariable "cool date".

I don't think June 6, 2006 will be a particular problem. Even if you are really superstitious, the fact that it's actually 2006 breaks up the number.

(on the other hand, I was once employee 666 for a company. The numbers were being assigned at a new hire meeting, and when they got up to 666 there was an awkward pause before I offered to swap numbers with the person it was being assigned to. Everyone went away happy, and my employee number was never an issue.)
posted by tkolar at 10:19 AM on April 10, 2006


Thread got a bit away from the old 666 thing didnt it :P

Beth and Jellicle thanks for your comments. I dont know much about the process they use to induce labor, so any information on how it will affect my wife's and baby's health is appreciated.

The whole question of inducing came up because earlier in her pregnancy she took a blood test and tested positive for gestational diabetes. She took a one hour glucose test and tested positive. A month later she took a 3 hour glucose test and tested negative, but this was after a month of diet change and excercise.

The Doctor is concernced because although she test negative now, most likely she DID have it for a time and babies born with gestational diabetes have a higher rate of c-sections because they are a bit larger. Another factor is that my family has a history of c-sections in babies because of heads too large for the birth canal, her family has a similar history. The doctor wanted to make sure that the baby was delivered early enough to be born vaginally based on the gestational diabetes scare, and family history (HUGE HEADS!).

The tuesday morning shift is definitely right on, he did tell us that he wanted to deliver the 5th, but he doesnt do deliveries on mondays, so that is where the 6th came from. Her estimated due date is the 11th, so it really is only 5 days early. The doctor let us know that if we came in on the 6th and she wasnt dialated at all then he wouldnt want to induce her as neither of us want he labor to be long, and we want to minimize the chance of a C-Section. We are definitely newbies at this, and so far our Doctor has been great at helping us through everything and letting us know our options.

Thanks to everyone for the comments on the birthday and the inducement!
posted by skrike at 10:22 AM on April 10, 2006


If this birthdate is a problem for your child, he will have learned that from you. Therefore, it's only a problem if you think it is.
posted by normy at 10:25 AM on April 10, 2006


I think it would be kind of nifty. I wanted to have my youngest son on 04-04-04, but they insisted upon inducing me and he was born on 03-24-04. And even though they induced me because he was going to be "huge"-- he was less than 7 pounds. The doctor who made the determination of "huge" was supposed to some kind of ultrasound expert-- "He wrote the book on ultrasound! Literally!" someone told me.

Induction isn't that unpleasant if you have an epidural. (At least it wasn't for me. I've labored both with and without an epidural, and I definitely recommend WITH.) And I don't think that the doctors really do it for their convenience-- it doesn't take a set amount of time. It's different for every woman.

Keep in mind, just because the induction starts on 06-06-06, doesn't mean the baby will actually be born that day. They got my pitocin going around 2 p.m. on 3-23, and the baby wasn't born until 4:30 a.m. on 4-24. I don't know what the average time it takes for induced labor is, but I'm sure the actual time varies widely. I'd guess it won't even be an issue, unless your wife turns out to be prone to short labor.
posted by Shoeburyness at 10:30 AM on April 10, 2006


Another vote for "don't induce". Know too that the standardly calculated due date is eight days earlier than women naturally have first children, on average.
It's not like the baby is going to double in size in a week. If you want to have the baby when it's small, induce now.*
*don't really
posted by Aknaton at 10:35 AM on April 10, 2006


Some doctors schedule you for an induction or c-section so that you're in the queue. You might not actually end up delivering on that date. It's just that it's easier to set everything up now and reschedule than it is to have to do it the day before. At least, that's what one doctor told me.
posted by acoutu at 11:03 AM on April 10, 2006


My sister tested positive for GD and was induced early for the same reason. She posts regularly here, so I hope she sees this thread and can help with any questions you might have.

(aside: using an ultrasound to determine fetal weight is not an exact science. According to mine, my son was supposed to be between 9 and 9.5 pounds when he was born, but everyone said "they're never accurate, they're always wrong, your son'll be about 7 pounds or so." He was exactly 9.5 pounds.)
posted by Lucinda at 11:04 AM on April 10, 2006


Thread got a bit away from the old 666 thing didnt it

That's probably because the 666 thing is ridiculous and people are quite rightly concentrating on what's best for the baby. Another vote against letting the doctor schedule birth for his own convenience.
posted by languagehat at 11:09 AM on April 10, 2006


If this birthdate is a problem for your child, he will have learned that from you. Therefore, it's only a problem if you think it is.

Not at all -- I certainly didn't learn about The Number of the Beast from my parents. I learned it from my friends and Iron Maiden and getting silly with Nostradamus.

But I agree it's a ridiculous and trumped-up thing. He'll deal with it. I mean, there are countless other people whose birthdays will be on that day regardless of whether they chose it or not. He won't be alone.
posted by Miko at 11:42 AM on April 10, 2006


Consider hiring a doula- a child birth assistant. While they are non-medical they have training in what various options can arise out of and lead into. It can be very helpful to have someone clear headed as an advocate during the whole process.
posted by pointilist at 11:44 AM on April 10, 2006


Lucinda's sister, checking in -- I had gestational diabetes and a 38 week induced labor, and everything turned out just fine.

I wouldn't worry about the birthday...if it's a choice between sharing with Steve Vai or Donnie Van Zandt? Meh, at least it's memorable. It'll make for a giggle at kindergarten registration.

If you and your wife are happy with the care you are receiving? Don't sweat the armchair obstetricians. It's good practice for not sweating the armchair child psychologists.
posted by gnomeloaf at 12:07 PM on April 10, 2006


gnomeloaf
Hearing that makes me feel much better!

Hows the baby now? What was the birthweight? Any suggestions?
posted by skrike at 12:33 PM on April 10, 2006


Just don't name the kid Mark.
posted by I Love Tacos at 12:34 PM on April 10, 2006


skrike - sent you an email. If it happens that anyone else has questions about life with gestational diabetes, feel free to get in touch -- info is in the profile.
posted by gnomeloaf at 1:10 PM on April 10, 2006


The remake of the film 'The Omen 666' is set to debut in theaters on 06/06/06.
posted by ericb at 1:13 PM on April 10, 2006


Movie website here.
posted by ericb at 1:15 PM on April 10, 2006


They got my pitocin going around 2 p.m. on 3-23, and the baby wasn't born until 4:30 a.m. on 4-24.

Wow!
posted by Dick Paris at 1:41 PM on April 10, 2006


Argument against being born on 6/6/06: Ann Coulter's new book comes out that day.
posted by IvyMike at 1:52 PM on April 10, 2006


Wasn't there some academic work done recently that indicated that 666 was NOT the number of the beast? Darnit if my google-fu is turning up bupkist.
posted by eurasian at 3:32 PM on April 10, 2006


Ah. hrm, MTV as a news source. I'm pretty sure this was in mainstream media (take whatever value you will from it). Apparently the mark of the beast may be 616
posted by eurasian at 3:43 PM on April 10, 2006


I certainly didn't learn about The Number of the Beast from my parents

Me neither, but you probably acquired at least some of their opinions, prejudices, biases and quirks - as we all do.
posted by normy at 3:48 PM on April 10, 2006


I had gestational diabetes and delivered 5 days after my due date. My baby weighed 8 lbs, 7 oz (as did I, 30 years ago), and he had a perfectly normal-sized head! So I agree with several posters who you've marked best answer: don't necessarily agree right now to an induction. Wait and see.

But if you do induce, unless it's at midnight on the 6th, you may not have the baby until the 7th. Just a thought.
posted by peep at 4:22 PM on April 10, 2006


My mother induced me on my older brothers birthday. She thusly saved having to pay for at least 16 birthday parties.(There may have been other reasons) I havent noticed any problems with my health.

I say, If you don't trust your doctor, Find a different one. If you trust him or her, Take his advice or you're just wasting both of your time.
posted by Megafly at 6:03 PM on April 10, 2006


Another gestational diabetic here, also due early June. I've got one of the best perinatologists around. At 36 weeks, I'll have an ultrasound to determine how big the baby is and what her head-to-belly ratio is. At that time, he will be able to make an educated and informed recommendation. Before that, everything is guesswork. I'm personally hoping to avoid induction/c-section if it is a safe and reasonable possibility.

My understanding is that a one-hour GTT does not diagnose gestational diabetes, but perhaps different systems have different procedures. False positives do happen with the one-hour test. I was only diagnosed when I failed both.

As for the date? If you're not comfortable with it, go ahead and change it.
posted by moira at 9:01 PM on April 10, 2006


you probably acquired at least some of their opinions, prejudices, biases and quirks - as we all do.

I'm not arguing that. I'm arguing that even if the parents project absolutely no values onto the 6/6/06 birthday, the kid will still encounter this idea in the culture, from friends, and from reading. True that if the parents dismiss it as ridiculous, that might help the child do so, but it's not as though the child will never be exposed to the 'number of the beast' myth. I'd wager it's a topic of notice and discussion among his or her friends before the age of 12.

But again, I personally wouldn't worry about it.
posted by Miko at 6:55 AM on April 11, 2006


The largest number of horror stories I've heard about birthing experiences involve picotin (labor-inducing drug) so I would avoid induction if at all possible.
posted by agregoli at 9:44 AM on April 11, 2006


Moira, and anyone else who is interested, a one hour GTT diagnoses gestational diabetes only if that reading is 200 or more. Depending on your doctor, a reading of >130 or 140 will trigger the second test. The 3 hour test has 4 readings (a fasting reading, and after each hour). Numbers exceeding certain guidelines for any two of those readings results in a diagnosis of GD.
posted by peep at 9:50 AM on April 11, 2006


So... should we be congratulating a new daddy today?
posted by ferociouskitty at 4:41 PM on June 6, 2006


« Older On-screen sexual intercourse - a comparitive...   |   Where did this Coke come from? Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.