Advanced search

Got questions about giving birth? Know what to expect and when to expect it, with the Mumsnet Pregnancy Calendar.

How can they get it so wrong?

(13 Posts)
FreeNiki Wed 17-May-17 23:07:57

My friend had a baby a few days ago. Is not a mner.

She was told weeks and weeks ago her baby was over sized and would need an induction early. Ends up non progression after induction and an emergency is just dead on 7lbs confused

They told her weeks ago it was oversized and she may as well have left her in there for the extra couple of weeks. She's a bit peeved.

PastysPrincess Wed 17-May-17 23:09:54

Dunno, I was opposite. Told I was having a 7lb baby, left to go 2 weeks overdue and he 11lb 9oz.

Whatwankeryisthis Wed 17-May-17 23:12:03

Goodness, she's been out through a lot unnecessarily then.

They scanned me to make sure the placenta was still functioning properly at 42+1 and said "there's lots of fluid but baby looks around 8lbs"
Had an EMCS the following day as the cord prolapsed when they broke my water and 20 mins later I was handed an 11lb baby!!!

DuggeeHugs Thu 18-May-17 08:01:35

It seems to be far from an exact science. Last time my 37 week growth scan was only 1oz out. This time it's still early (30 weeks) but my growth scan has measured just above the 10th percentile and fundal height is continuing just above 90th. I've already been told it'll be an early CS, I just don't think anyone knows how big this baby will be!

PastysPrincess Thu 18-May-17 08:11:31

I ended up putting a complaint in about my treatment (for multiple other reasons) but in the reply I was told that even the most experienced obstetrician would struggle to accurately tell the weight of a baby prior to birth

robinia Thu 18-May-17 08:18:57

Which begs the question of why they induce on such flimsy evidence.

PastysPrincess Thu 18-May-17 08:43:07

Yes, their excuse for not noticing my baby was huge is that it's really difficult to tell before baby is why treat that information as gospel truth then?? The only further response I got was that they followed the NICE that's that then.

Crumbs1 Thu 18-May-17 09:18:17

Well she has a healthy live baby. It's about assessing and responding to risk. There'd be far more of an outcry if the staff felt it was a very large baby, didn't respond and there was a less positive outcome.
There's also something called consent - it's the time to have that discussion about the why's, the evidence base and the risks/benefits of the suggested procedure. Your friend has some responsibility for making the decision to induce too.

haveacupoftea Thu 18-May-17 10:12:48

Yes I agree with crumbs. Your friend agreed to be induced. The staff were doing what they could do reduce the risks - can you imagine if the baby had been big and suffered shoulder dystocia or some other horrid condition as a result of being left to grow? And the baby was safe and well so really what's the issue?

HaPPy8 Thu 18-May-17 10:37:52

Well lots of things make it harder. Maternal build can make it harder to do the scan. Fetal position can make it harder to do the scan. Maternal tissue type can make it harder. How low the baby is in the pelvis can make it harder. So lots of things make the scan harder to technically perform which can mean they get it wrong. But they have to work with the best that is available to them and most of the time they are accurate 'enough' to inform clinical decisions.

I agree with what Crumb has said above too.

silkpyjamasallday Thu 18-May-17 11:07:12

This happened to my friend, told baby was tiny and would struggle staying in the womb until due date so needed to be induced, baby was well over 8lbs and she endured a long and unnecessary induction for no reason after having a perfect VBAC with her first. I understand they have to err on the side of caution, but if this had been me I would be absolutely livid.

Gooseygoosey12345 Thu 18-May-17 11:17:40

My baby's belly is measuring big, so lots of extra tests which have all been normal. Spoke to midwife about it and she said that they're really not THAT accurate and basically to ignore it if all the tests came back normal. Obviously it's great that it's being monitored but I'm unsure of why they place so much weight on these measurements if even my midwife is saying it's not that great of a scale of measurement

EpoxyResin Thu 18-May-17 13:06:31

Hmmm, I don't think a healthy infant is the only desirable outcome from a birth - although obviously it is (to my mind) the most important one. Just because that is achieved doesn't mean noting else about the process was unacceptable.

OP, it doesn't sound as if they did explain to your friend that there was only a chance the baby would be big, and that they were proposing a course of action based on that, but that there was a chance they were wrong. In which case I don't think they gave her the choice that she should have had. If it was presented to her as "this is how things are, this is what we're going to do about it", I don't think that's really okay. And it happens a lot with pregnant women.

Obviously the hospital did what the guidelines said they should to do the best for the baby, but did they do their best by the mother? Did they give her the honest information about how likely different out comes and involve her in the decision making process over what happens to her body and how her baby is born? It doesn't sound like they did. And I think that should be a minimum standard in a birth scenario as well as that a healthy infant is delivered.

Join the discussion

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

Register now »

Already registered? Log in with: