Would you like to be a member of our research panel? Join here - there's (nearly) always a great incentive offered for your views.
ZOMBIE THREAD ALERT: This thread hasn't been posted on for a while.
If you were told you were likely to have a huge baby and you were offered a C Section would you have one?(32 Posts)
I had an extra scan today as the baby has unlateral talipes/clubfoot and the consultant wants to do another growth scan at 36 weeks due to the large measurements taken today.
All the head measurements are off the scale and abodominal circumfrence is at 95th percentile. DH was 10lbs 8 and has a v large head, he was delvered via CS. My brother is 6'5 (and was one of the longest babies ever born in our hosiptal). I'm not small at all at 5'9 and pre pg was size 14-16. However my mum had fast labours and tearing so I'm quite worried about this potential giant I might be having.
If you had the option would you take them up on a section? Thanks
Yes. Before I had my baby I was very worried about a section and desperate to avoid one. But he was over 11lbs and back to back and it was a fecking nightmare.
If I had know that he was going to be so big I would have opted for a pre arranged section.
Yes I would, but I'd have a c-section whatever the size of baby so possibly not the best person answer your question. What are the birth weights of people in your family? You, your siblings. Theoretically your baby shouldn't grow a baby you can't give birth to, but that's not always the case.
On the other hand, scans are notoriously unreliable at predicting size...
I am on a similar scale to you, btw, and thought this would mean a big baby would not be such a problem.
Yes. You're seriously risking getting damaged in ways that aren't easily fixed. Prolapse, incontinence - none of these are glamorous and the recovery is much greater than it should be for an elective section.
I had a 3rd degree tear which recovered well but it took a while. It wasn't as bad as I had been dreading (it sounds terrible!) but not nice either.
I'd go for a section regardless of size....
No and I was offered a c section for this reason.
My biggest was 10lb 13oz and head circumference was off the chart at birth. But they hadn't predicted he would be big. Ad it was an easy water birth.
For my next baby they thought she was big and offered a c section, I refused as I had already delivers a big babies fine and actually I didn't think she was that big, purely my instinct as she didn't feel as heavy. I was right and the massive baby predicted by scans wad 8lb exactly!
Scans are notoriously inaccurate for predicting size and weight of babies esp in late pregnancy. Generally they are at least 10% out.
I am 5 2 and size 10/12.
Tbh it's babies positioning more than size that can make a difference to how birth goes.
I think it depends how you feel about giving birth? I had a c section first time due to ds1 being breech. I was really determined to have ds2 'normally', even when told he had a giant head!
I had a second degree (almost third degree) tear and also been left with a partial prolapse. I'd do it again though.
Not trying to sound like a martyr or anything, I just desperately wanted to experience a vaginal birth. I'm always a believer that on the whole (and I know there are exceptions) your body makes babies that are the right size for you.
Yes I am concerned about prolapse etc Theres should I wait for my 36 week scan to confirm whether baby is still big or should I speak to midwife at next appointment?
I would opt for the section without a moment's hesitation. I have had one emergency c section and one very fast labour followed by a forceps delivery. Recovery from the section was a walk n the park compared to the VB.
Little I'm nervous about birth but not overly so but don't feel i need to give birth 'normally' if I could get long term damage.
beccajoh I was about 7.5 lbs my brother was about 8.5 and then DH and his sister were both over 10lbs
not necessarily. Whats your pelvis like?? How do you feel about birthing in general?
my ds2 was 10lb, born on my living room floor, and i didnt even tear. It was pretty painful though but not more so than my 6lb ds1, in fact it was certainly a better birth experience. I had a fantastic midwife and my dh was such a supportive birth partner. I think that makes so much more difference than size of baby.
I think I'd refuse it because I'm a great believer in my body doing what it's supposed to. That said, I was having growth scans at 36 weeks with both of mine because my bump wasn't big enough! My biggest baby was 7lb so I have no experience of what I'd do if I did have a big baby!
I've subsequently been told that the prolapse isn't always a direct result of the birth - it's as much about carrying a heavy baby around for 10 months! I've also been told that more than half if women who have babies will have it (in varying degrees) irrespective of how they've had the baby.
So don't immediately think that you'll end up battered and bruised! I'd also say that a year on, I have no obvious ailments from either the tear or the partial prolapse. Don't wet myself when I sneeze or anything
Im having a 38 week scan tomorrow as 32 week was measuring 3 weeks ahead and 36 week was measuring 41 weeks (97th centike). My consultant is away next week hence the scan at 38. He is also thought to be back to back and I am now desperate for an elective section as Im worried about shoulder dystocia/hypoxia and the potential damage to me. I know that many women have big babies with no issue but they cant guarantee that. Its also unlikely I will ibe having a second child. The midife I
I'm the same height/size as you. DS weighed just over 11lbs, his head was 41.5 cm I think. He was born at home, as planned. 6 hr labour. Not a single stitch. So, no Op would not op for a c-section for that reason alone. It was calm, straightforward and painful!
Out of 5 vaginal births, his was by far the best experience. The second best was being induced with a drip, and having an epidural in place from 2cm. 12 hr labour. 7lb baby. It was calm, straightforward and pain free!
Sorry, issues with pisting here these days. Yesterdays midwife was pretty mych saying they would push me to have a vaginal delivery and basically said it was nirmal for first timers to have prolonged labours, epudurals and tears. My consultant has said if tomirrows scan is big I could ask for an elective section. Its not everyones choice but I would sooner recover from planned surgery than a long labour followed by emergency section or nasty tear/damage. DH was discussing this with a colleague yesterday whos wife has recently had an emergency section and he agreed.
If it were a first baby I definitely would. The scans are not accurate but personally I wouldn't take the chance.
They scared me stupid from their scans that Ds was enormous- in the end he turned out to be 6lbs 11oz but long. If I'd been offered a section I would've taken it even though it wouldn't have turned out to be necessary because of his size.
I would've have avoided my delightful back to back labour and an emergency forceps delivery.
I wouldn't (having had big, but not really massive babies, vaginally without trouble). Can you find a midwife to talk to who has experience of delivering large babies: she might be able to offer you a balanced view.
Hope you and your baby have a good birth, whatever you choose, and that the clubfoot can be dealt with effectively.
Yes. I had the same measurements as you when pregnant and DS was indeed 10 lbs (scans are not always accurate but apparently if you have three that say the same thing, they give them more weight). I wanted an elective as I was most worried about shoulder dystocia or him getting stuck (I was really against the use of forceps). They refused and instead I ended up with an EMCS after a couple days of labour.
I do completely understand why people would turn down the CS. It's just for me, not being overly fussed about the birth experience and knowing I would just be sick if I refused a section and then things went wrong, I would go ahead and take it. An elective is so much better than an EMCS.
It's a tough one. I had an EMCS with DC1 (for reasons unrelated to his size). With DC2 I had a scan at around 36 weeks where they told me that would be 10lb plus (I'm 5'2 and petite), which panicked me and I opted for a repeat C-section instead of a VBAC. The repeat section was absolutely fine and my recovery was very easy, but DC2 was actually only a little over 8lbs, and I do, knowing that, regret not trying for a VBAC, especially now that I'm expecting DC3 and facing my 3rd c-section.
So I think I'm saying, try to be as sure as you can be that the scan prediction is right (second opinion?), and if you are planning more children, think carefully before opting for a c-section, as each post-section pregnancy is a little riskier than the last, and each c-section a little more difficult.
Well it's hard to know for sure the size of the baby until they come out! I was told dc2 would be around 7lbs but when she came out she was 10lb 6oz.
If I had known before I would have gone for a c-section, it hurt a lot more than dc1 - not so much the pushing but the contractions were much more painful. I didn't enjoy being stitched up for 2 hours afterwards either. Although I am relieved I didn't have to have the tough c-section recovery.
If I were to have another I would opt for a c-section.
Thanks for the useful advice on here - much appreciated.
I'm not sure if I should get a second opinion - my consultant at Chelsea & Westminster is v v experienced and with our family traits the baby size is to be expected I suppose.
Fingers crossed I'd like another DC after this one so good point Some about the subsequent c sections.
Due to the clubfoot I dont want to risk other complications such as hip or shoulder issues so maybe that will push me towards the CS choice.
I am smaller than you and my scan for DC1 showed a large baby. (6lb 13½ at 34 weeks gestation, which oddly enough was the weight BOTH DC2 and DC3 were when they were born). I had to come and have another scan as "he was measuring so big." Having put the fear of fuck into me, they then decided all was well and all my fears and inquiries about erm wouldn't a c-section be better were fobbed off.
I think he was in a bad position (poss back to back? I dunno, didn't have Mumsnet then) but labour didn't progress and his head didn't come down and I got my c-section as he started to show extremely mild signs of distress. He was 9lb 9oz with a BIG head (wore adult size hats by the time he was about 4).
My MIL's first baby had been stillborn and when I saw her after having DS1 she said sadly "A caesarean. That's what they said I should have had." DH was her third child and was 9lb 8 . . . MIL was tiny. <eyes water> I strongly suspect that her first was another big one and she was in the same position as me but they just didn't do caesareans as often as they do now. I feel so so sad for her.
My take on this is that even now they do not offer c-sections lightly, if they have offered it, then they think you NEED it.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.