Would you like to be a member of our research panel? Join here - there's (nearly) always a great incentive offered for your views.

Are big babies easier to push out???

(28 Posts)
lisaleigh1986 Wed 17-Jul-13 10:36:36

its all in the title smile

SourSweets Wed 17-Jul-13 11:04:32

No experience as I am still waiting for my first, but I literally just asked my midwife this question this morning. She said weight has nothing to do with it, it's all about how b

SourSweets Wed 17-Jul-13 11:06:16

Oops sorry, ...how big the head is and whether its positioned directly over the cervix or off to the side. Are you expecting a big 'un?

ishchel Wed 17-Jul-13 11:06:20

lots of other things impact on how easy/hard it will be to push a baby out. Size is not one of them.

MangoJuiceAddict Wed 17-Jul-13 11:07:47

My DD was 8lb 4oz and eaaaaasy. I don't want to sound smug but my labour was a dream. I went into labour at 6am, stayed at home in the bath and practising breathing exercises until lunchtime, then had a water birth in hospital with no pain relief and DD was in my arms by 4pm. Breaking my leg hurt more than giving birth. However, my sister's DS was just 6lb 1oz and she had an agonising birth, lots of stitches etc. I would give birth again tomorrow without any issues, its just the actual pregnancy and night feeds that put me off doing it again wink

cupcake78 Wed 17-Jul-13 11:08:34

I don't think it makes any difference! Ds 9lb 5oz a long hard back to back labour! Dd 8lb 9oz fast 3 hour normal labour.

It's not the size that was the issue it was the position of the baby and how tired I was.

MangoJuiceAddict Wed 17-Jul-13 11:08:40

And I also fear that I may not be so lucky second time around!

peachactiviaminge Wed 17-Jul-13 11:14:18

10lb 4 DD was a very easy labour with two stitches two and a half hours from waters breaking and contractions starting to birth
9lb 1 DS was even easier with second stage (pushing) lasting 4 minutes whole labour was two hours and fifteen minutes.

5madthings Wed 17-Jul-13 11:14:33

My biggest baby was my easiest birth 10lb 13oz and his head circumference was off the chart! Under an hour in the birthing pool.

My smallest was my hardest labour 8lb exactly but she was back to back and came out facing the wrong way up. Still took less than three hours.

My others were 9lb+ and all fine.

juneau Wed 17-Jul-13 11:23:56

No, I'm sure bigger babies aren't easier. It's all about the position of the baby, the position you're in to labour and whether it's your first or subsequent baby. DS2 was bigger and he came out really fast, but that's apparently really common. First babies tend to take a lot longer, because that big has come out that way before!

chillynose Wed 17-Jul-13 15:57:28

I would say yes as they have more strength to come put

Dd1 was 6lbs12 labour 16 hours
Dd2 was 8lbs7 labour 8 hours

Dd2 was much quicker and less stressful

It's all about the positioning and the size of the head!!!

DS was 9lb $ and my first. The labour was only 4 hours long (which I really think was down to his size and the fact I'd been having bad braxton hicks for weeks before) but he got stuck in the birth canal for an hour during the pushing stage.

After some intervention he did eventually squeeze his way into the world, with difficulty. Turns out his head measurement was similar to that of the average one month old hmm

*9lb 4

badguider Wed 17-Jul-13 16:00:42

I don't think they're easier or harder.. it's all about position isn't it?

(if his head was smaller I'm pretty sure he'd have come shooting out like a bar of soap as going from 6cm to crowning only took an hour)!

Bakingtins Wed 17-Jul-13 16:04:06

I think however big the baby, if they are full term there is not that much variation in the size of their head. The rest is down to position of the baby and position you labour in, and what interventions happen that may affect 2nd stage. I agree with the others that said that your body having done it before is a big factor in how easy the pushing bit is.

MarianForrester Wed 17-Jul-13 16:05:22

My big baby was a nightmare to get out! But I d think it just depends on lots of things. Plus he was freaky big.

Overreactionoftheweek Wed 17-Jul-13 16:15:18

Ds was 10lb and I think at least half of that was his giant giant head - he got totally stuck and I had a cs. He was back to back so maybe just at the wrong angle as well

KeepTheFaithBaby Wed 17-Jul-13 17:10:23

I dunno DD was 5lb 4oz and back up back. Contractions were tough, labour was basically 1h 50 mins! But the pushing part was relatively easy - she came out with three contractions!

KeepTheFaithBaby Wed 17-Jul-13 17:10:37

Back to back!

bigkidsdidit Wed 17-Jul-13 17:12:40

In my experience, yes, my 9-10 back to back one was far easier and less paknful than my 8-13 one. I guess despite the back to back ness he was just in a better position?

beachesandbuckets Wed 17-Jul-13 20:37:30

Yes in my experience. Midwife said that big babies drop like lead weights, the benefit of gravity! Ds was 10lb, 6hr labour, dd was 10lb, 20 min labour, both straightforward and easy labours. good luck!

lozza22 Wed 17-Jul-13 21:11:02

From my own experience id say yes but imagine its not same for everyone. My daughter was 7,10 and i tore and had epesiotomy which was awful to heal but generally was quick labour. My so was 9,5 and vitrually shot out altho again i needed to be cut but no tearing with him. I did end up with multiple prolapses from my son tho so i would suggest kegal kegal kegal!!! x

Xmasbaby11 Wed 17-Jul-13 21:31:20

Not in my experience. DD was 9 15 and after a very long difficult labour resulted in a severe prolapse.

Size is a factor in prolapses, so you need to be kept an eye on to make sure the delivery isn't prolonged.

lozza22 Wed 17-Jul-13 21:35:27

xmasbaby what prolapse did u end up with and hav u had repair?

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now