Advanced search

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

Baby measuring big- help!

(18 Posts)
Caridge Mon 23-May-16 14:23:57

Hi all, I'm 34+2 with my second baby and have been told this morning that he is measuring between 36-37 weeks. I've already had a GTT which came back fine and a growth scan last month which was also fine but now I need to have them both repeated. I was hoping for a home birth so feeling a bit deflated, has anyone had a similar situation? Appreciate your help. Xx

eatsleephockeyrepeat Mon 23-May-16 14:37:52

Hi Caridge, is that measurement from the midwife measuring your bump or another scan? The bump measuring is so inaccurate, they just use it as a marker to refer you for GTT tests or growth scans, so don't put too much stock in it.

My DS was measuring big right through my pregnancy; I had growth scans every 4 weeks from 28 weeks and a GTT which was negative. My 36 week scan estimated DS to weigh 7lbs 16oz already!

Little was I to know that he would in fact be born less than a week later at 37 weeks - so still considered full term - after my water's broke, and he was only 7lb 6oz. Goes to show there is some margin for error with those scans.

Plus there is a wide time frame when you could give birth; if you were 37/38/39 weeks, perhaps more, your baby still wouldn't be much bigger than an average new born! Don't panic just yet that things will be any more difficult than you first thought; there really is no need. If of course you end up going over you due date or baby has a huuuge growth spurt the doctor's will be well prepared - as will you - but cross that bridge when and if you come to it. For now just trust your body will know when your baby's big enough to evict grin It's not fool proof of course (some people do end up needing help!) but there's no reason to believe your body and your baby don't know what they're doing smile

Caridge Mon 23-May-16 14:41:52

Hi - thank you so much that's really kind. The measurement was done by the midwife measuring bump so I'm hoping the scan will say all is ok. Good news that your sons weight was all ok in the end, you do hear that a lot which is why I was getting anxious thinking they might suggest starting me off when actually his weight is fine. I'll wait for the scan then and go from there. Thank you for your kind words grin

eatsleephockeyrepeat Mon 23-May-16 14:50:58

No probs smile I was fully expecting a big baby as my big brother was 9lb1oz when born and I was 9lb13!! shock

Then when I started having scans and DS's measurements were top of the charts I really started to worry... I was quite surprised to have an average sized baby in the end, but more surprised to have him at 37 weeks; hadn't even started maternity leave!

Good luck with the scan - and the rest of your pregnancy. Ooh and enjoy having another glimpse of baby whilst you're there.

Caridge Mon 23-May-16 14:58:13

Aw yeah I'm not surprised you expected it!! My husband was over 9lb but my daughter was only 7lb2 a week late so I didn't expect a big baby this time really but you never really know.
Yes getting to see him again at the scan is an added bonus smile xx

Flossiesmummy Thu 26-May-16 11:12:06

They told me my first would be approx 10lb at term, based on growth scans in the third trimester.

She was 8 days late and 8lb 11oz

Utter nonsense.

Oysterbabe Thu 26-May-16 11:33:18

I was told I was measuring big throughout. DD was born at 35+5 weighing 4lbs 13, way below the 2nd centile.

MrsGlam Thu 26-May-16 12:41:15

I was told my LB was going to big from 24 week scan onwards at my last scan 5 days before he was born he was predicted to be 8lb 2ozs with a bug head..I had lots of growth scans..i was induced at 38+4 and he was 7lb 6ozs and normal size head..I had to send H to the shop because i had only 1 vest and 1 baby grow that would fit him!
They are very inaccurate. I even developed GD at 34 weeks so try not to worry!

MrsGlam Thu 26-May-16 12:42:07

Big head not bug head lol

bluechameleon Thu 26-May-16 13:54:19

Growth scans aren't particularly reliable either:
This study is from the US but growth scans are much more common there so there is a lot more data to analyse.
I measured a week ahead consistently through my pregnancy and was told baby would be "a bit big". Not offered growth scan or GTT as they weren't particularly concerned. He was 11lb11oz which I class as more than "a bit big"! I'm telling you this to illustrate that they really don't know how big your baby is so don't worry. If your baby is big then you will just deal with that when it comes to it.

KnitsBakesAndReads Thu 26-May-16 16:14:16

In my experience the bump measurements are not to be relied on!

My MW insisted my baby was already over 10lbs at 39 weeks. She spent ages telling me scare stories about how "high risk" my labour was and all the things that were likely to go wrong. I was also told I could no longer go to the midwife led unit but had to deliver on labour ward.

My baby arrived nearly a week later and about 1.5lbs smaller than she'd predicted. I wish I'd known before that bump measurements aren't an exact science - it would have saved me a lot of anxiety about labour.

princesspineapple Fri 27-May-16 07:11:08

Try not to worry too much, bump measuring is always a bit objective, I had mine measured every day at 38 weeks (extra monitoring) and it was different every time!
I also had a growth scan at 38 weeks which said that DD weighed 8lb9oz, and they said to expect at least a 9 pound baby... I was induced at 40+6 and she weighed 8lb3oz... We had to go shopping for newborn clothes the next day!

CaptainCallisto Fri 27-May-16 07:33:59

Another voice in the don't panic chorus. I was told from about 25 weeks to expect a big baby. Based on various scans and measurements they said to expect 12lb+ shock

DS1 was born at 40+9 weighing...8lb 1oz.

He was ridiculously long, but lean. Luckily I'd packed some newborn clothes as a 'just in case' smile

Shanster Fri 27-May-16 22:51:18

Yep, I agree growth scans are not accurate. I was induced at 40+4 with my first because they thought she was already 9lbs...she was 7lbs8oz. Long, hard labour that my body wasn't ready for. With #2, they did say I was measuring big...he was 9lbs8oz and a much easier labour and delivery than the first. Big babies are great, you don't have to wake up to feed them every 2 hours, my son slept 3-4 hours from the very start.
Even if you are having a big baby, doesn't mean you'll have a difficult birth.

Marmalade85 Fri 27-May-16 22:53:30

Mine measured big and It was recommended I have a c section. He was born 10lb

Ginmakesitallok Fri 27-May-16 22:55:14

I was told dd2 was going to be a "monster". 6lb 4 in the end.

paddypants13 Fri 27-May-16 22:58:32

I also measured big through both my pregnancies and was tested for gestational diabetes multiple times.

Dd was 9lb so quite big for a first baby I was told DS was transverse and was going to be 10lb plus. He turned at 37 weeks and was 8lb 11.5.

Don't panic and congratulationsflowers

BertrandRussell Fri 27-May-16 22:59:27

Just because a baby's on the big side doesn't mean you can't have a perfectly straightforward birth. My two were 9'9 and 10'6- a 10 hour and a 3 hour labour respectively and straightforward vaginal births. So don't worry!

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