Thanks for the replies guys. I knew the placenta deteriorated quicker, but didn't know that this could not be monitored. In that context then an induction does seem wise. I wonder why the risk of placenta deterioration and increased risk of still birth? I'd very much like to see the research behind these (and many other) statements. I wonder if it is based on older research from when the tools available to control diabetes were a bit more crude.
<snip>
I can't say too much or give any names or links because this is research yet to be published.
However I am aware of a study where the BG monitoring is very advanced and there are apparently still enhanced risks in going to full term if you are diabetic however good your control is.
The other thing not mentioned directly so far; I understand one of the risks to the developing baby is that its pancreas tries to take over the load for both mother and child which results in it having to work harder than normal, and also is one explanation for high birth weight. Simply, as I understand it the baby is taking glucose out of the shared blood stream and depositing it as fat, plus possibly getting more nutrients than normal and growing faster.
Our first child was induced for medical reasons not related to diabetes (apparently the awkward little so-and-so was fighting with her mother whilst still in the womb).
Resulting high blood pressure discovered at the pre-natal check up in the hospital resulted in "We will admit you now. No, you can't walk to the ward you must sit in this wheel chair.".
Shortly followed by "The best place for your baby is in the cot next to you!".
She came out jaundiced and weighing 6 lbs 2 oz but it still going strong 30+ years later.