My feed
Premium

Please
or
to access all these features

Get updates on how your baby develops, your body changes, and what you can expect during each week of your pregnancy by signing up to the Mumsnet Pregnancy Newsletters.

Pregnancy

Gargantuan 37 week-er

7 replies

skippingturtle · 24/05/2010 17:55

Or is it? Had fundal height measured by doc today (community midwife appointments sometimes end up being done by doctors at my GP's surgery), who said the baby is the size it should be at 39 weeks. The measurement was considerably outside the graph in my notes.

I have been given an appointment for a scan with a consultant to check the baby's size. The doc today said that if the baby is looking very large it may be suggested that I'm induced early or have a section.

This is the second time this has happened, a midwife got such a high reading at about 30 weeks that she asked if I had my dates wrong (by a month!!!), but a scan a few days later showed the baby was a perfectly average size.

Is it anything to do with an anterior placenta? Lots of fluid? Too much cake?

OP posts:
Report
greenbeanie · 24/05/2010 19:14

Try not to worry to much, a large baby is certainly not cause for induction or a section unless it is caused by gestational diabetes or some other problem. Some of us just make bigger babies. Too much fluid can make you measure bigger and is sometimes an indication of gestational diabetes.

With both my ds's I measured between 4-5 weeks bigger than I should have done. Ds 1 was 9lb 15, born at 39 weeks and ds2 10lb7. Both big babies but both healthy and delivered normally. In fact labour with ds2 was just 2.5 hours. The problem with scans for bigger babies is that scans can be out by 20% so a 10lb baby could be predicted as 8lb or 12lb!! So they are not very accurate at all.
Try not be bullied into anything you don't want, it could be that you just make big babies and that your baby will be the right size for you.

Report
LeoniPoni · 24/05/2010 19:18

This happened to me at 35 weeks (I'm now 37). Baby was measuring giant by fundal measurement and then the scan showed he was well within the graph 'norm'.

I was told that the fluid can cause this but it could also just be human error as it is nowhere near an exact science! Even the scan is apparently quite often wrong...so I took it all with a pinch of salt!

Report
skippingturtle · 24/05/2010 20:09

Thanks ladies, yes, definitely taking the fundal height with a pinch of salt!
Greenbeanie, interesting to hear the margin for error in scans, I'll try to remind myself of that if they predict a 12lb porker!
No mention of GB (that's what they test for with the urine dips, isn't it?), so hopefully all fine on that front.

The dad and I are both chunky so maybe a plumptious baby's on the cards!

OP posts:
Report
MrsGangly · 24/05/2010 20:13

When I was at the Fetal Assessment Unit (because of the baby had decided to have a few lazy days rather than because of growth - all fine, it's just going to be like its father, I think!), the midwife who measured me said you were 'allowed' 2cm either side of your dates as normal.

I was also on a seat next to their scanner so heard a couple of conversations of people sent up because their midwife was worried about size with people being reminded of what an inexact thing it is, but without doing scans every fortnight, it was the best guide of anything changing.

Report
lumpybits · 24/05/2010 21:26

I had this too. At 36 weeks I measured 41 so was sent in for a scan. They told me the baby was over 8lbs already and I was due to go back for a scan the following week. As it was, i went in to labour at 37 weeks and my son was 7lb 3 so they were quite a way out. I think mine was due to water as there was an awful lot of it! I am now 26 weeks pregnant and HUGE again so think its probably down to the way different women carry babies.

Report
ReshapeWhileDamp · 24/05/2010 22:07

I don't know why they bother measuring fundal height once you're at that stage. It means almost nothing. A scan can tell more, but with a 25% error rate. DS was meant to be huge - I think it was about 24 weeks, I measured three weeks over the norm (two weeks is their max before they start flapping) so I had a growth scan a couple of weeks later and yes, he was on the large side, but nothing terrible. A few weeks later I had another one and he was bang on average. I kept on saying 'I'm 5'2" and short-waisted, where do you expect my bump to go but out?' but nobody listened. I'll be forewarned next time!

(DS was born at term, 7lb 4, btw. )

Report
skippingturtle · 25/05/2010 07:30

Thanks, this is all good to hear!

OP posts:
Report
Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.