Would you like to be a member of our research panel? Join here - there's (nearly) always a great incentive offered for your views.
Ye gods, I am growing an enormo-baby!! Help please!(18 Posts)
Had a scan today at 36+6 to check how baby was presenting. He's head down, which is good news, as I would like to give birth in the lovely MLU nearby.
The sonographer did remark a bit on his size though: in particular, his biparietal diameter is off the graph. Literally, massive. 98mm.
All of his other measurements are also up near the 95th percentile. Other than femur length, which is on the 50th percentile - which is where it was at the 20 week scan. All his other measurements have increased dramatically from around the 50th percentile to the 95th! And in the picture she took, he looks like he has a really chubby little face!!
I am obviously now a bit worried that I am growing a 12lb monster with a humongous head. I was a curvy size 14 before getting pregnant, and 5'8" so quite tall. I have put on quite a lot of weight (2 and a half stone) but it is all bump, if you see what I mean, I have not gotten fat anywhere else. And whilst I have been eating quite a lot of cake, I have also been eating lots of fruit and veg and healthy meals.
My bump has been bang on the right 'size' at every MW appointment and there's been no sign of any GD or anything worrying in my wee. And the sonographer didn't make any recommendations or escalations in light of these measurements.
Are these measurements an exact science? Should I be scared?
Have I overeaten to the point where I have made my baby fat?? Is this my fault?
Am I inevitably in for a difficult labour, or is it possible to birth big babies in a MW led unit?
Growth scans are not particularly accurate so don't worry too much. According to scans DD was on course to be a whopper but she was a respectable 8lb when she was born 2 weeks past her due date. An American friend had a c-section earlier this year as she was told that her massive baby's head was too big to pass through her hips. He was 7lb with a perfectly normal head.
Oh, and 8lb DD was infinitely easier to deliver than 5lb DS, who required hoiking out by kiwi cup after 2 hours of pushing.
My ds was "off the chart" at 36 weeks. Literally, off the chart. The sonographer had to work out the measurements by hand because the computer couldn't manage it. He was born at 36 +6 and weighed 8lb 10oz. However, of all my births it was the least painful by a long way.
I was told that ds2 was measuring 38 weeks at 36 weeks and had a massive head and tummy. Approximateweight was 7lb. When he was born a week later he weighed 5 lb 13oz with a tiny head and literally no fat on him. I wouldnt panic.
Also unusual that they have done bpd. Are you in the UK? Recommendations are that you use head circumference and have been for a while as babies have different shaped heads (long and thin or short and fat) and bpd can mask this. Do you have a hc plotted?
I gave birth to an 11lb baby at home. He was my forth and the others weighed 8.13, 9.7 and 7.15. I am 5ft 9.
I knew he was going to be big because I could feel his thigh through my skin and it was fat! I was refused a growth scan. The midwife thought I was mad and insisted he would be 8lb maximum. I'm glad she refused because I never would have been brave enough to do it at home if I had known!
The 11 lb one was the hardest work of my life, but was a fantastic experience. 6hr labour, no stitches. I used a tens machine and a little gas and air. He took a huge amount of effort to push out and he had a huge head and such broad fat shoulders. He could lift his head as soon as he was born and was just beautiful.
Please don't be scared.
Growth scans are often rubbish.
Both my dc were said to be over 11lbs at the 36 week scans I had (for that very reason - I always measured huge) ... dd was 7lb 8 and ds was a whopping 6lb!!!
With my first they told me DD was measuring small and sent me for numerous scans. They said they were concerned she would be small and m/w told me to eat more. I am a tall slim build and DD was born at 8lb 3oz so not small at all. I think as others have said scans can be rubbish, and of course it's not your fault.
My next DC due in 7 weeks is estimated to be 9lb not taking to much notice and liking the fact i've read bigger babies are easier to give birth to!
Try not to worry and enjoy the last few weeks.
I also went for a scan at 36 weeks (being monitored for polyhydramnios) and DC was also off the scale. He was estimated to be 8 pounds 10 at the time and, if accurate, I dread to think what he is now. I have an appointment on Monday and they might give me a sweep to get things started. I will be 38 weeks and at risk of shoulder getting stuck, apparently. However, I wrote a post on the child birth board on this and got some quite reassuring responses around size, induction and scans - similar to above. I am clinging to the hope that my body would probably not produce a baby which it cannot birth. I am only small/average, btw, and have similar concerns about what I've eaten affecting DC.
I don't think you can make your baby fat by eating too much while you're pregnant. You can definitely make yourself fat but your baby is fed via your bloodstream and the placenta is extremely effective at stripping out all the best bits to give your baby what it needs to grow.
Growth scans are hopeless. I had a scan at 36 weeks, was told ds was huge, likely to be 11lb+, would be almost difficult to deliver, that his head measurments were very large etc etc. He was 7lb 12 and perfectly normal and in proportion.
My best friend had the opposite exerience, told that her baby was tiny, less than 5lb with an over large head and stomach. She was born two weeks later at 8lb 5 and also perfectly in proportion.
I really woudn't worry too much, I hope all goes swimmingly for you
The weight of the baby s nothing to worry about its always the measurements so please bear this in mind. I was told if the measurements are on or over the 95th centile they should consider early induction. REMEMBER its not about the weight its about the measurement and my last son was just under the 95th centile which you are referring to. I hope I haven't worried you just have a little chat with the midwife about it at your next appointment.
Im sure everything will be fine. My three were all around the 90th-95th centile and weighed 9lb 7 oz, 8lb 6oz and 8lb 11oz.
Take care and good luck : )
Growth scans are a bit rubbish TBH, I was told my 9 and half pounder wasnt growing and would be small!
My easiest birth was the whopper one too.
Thanks guys - am feeling a little bit reassured!
They did take a head circumference measurement as well: this was about on the 95th centile...but at least this measurement was actually on the scale, unlike the biparietal measurement. Have done a bit of googling (error I know) and it seems this biparietal measurement is the width of the head from side to side. Which ties in with what the sonographer was saying about him having "chubby cheeks"...er thanks for that love!
I have also read up on the NiCE guidelines on induction of labour and they specifically do not recommend women are induced due to baby's projected size. So that makes me feel better. If there was some solid clinical evidence that women and their babies were at risk in natural labour with big babies, then I am sure NICE would recommend induction...
Twill be fine, I had DS (nearly 10lbs) at home in a pool with no issues or trauma to the nether regions
Subsequently fell pregnant with dd and had a growth scan at the same time as you, they said she was of the scale! She was also born st home with non pushing and weighed in at a puny 8lbs 3.5oz
Oh and my labours were 2.5hts and 1.5 hrs respectively
After 30 weeks the accuracy of growth scans is +\- 1.5lbs (depending on the sonographer and equipment, you can get some that are more accurate). I was told DS was going to be about 10/11lbs, he was 8lb15.
He was very long though, and I think the prediction matrix doesn't work as well if one of the measurements if significantly different. Also, if the baby has descended at all it is almost impossible to get a measurement of the head through the pelvis.
Growth scans are like guessing a persons weight from a picture. If baby is in the pelvis it's like guessing weight from a picture of someone who is standing in a box! Which is partially why Nice don't recommend induction on the basis of growth scans.
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.