Scan- big baby how accurate(37 Posts)
Hi I've posted before as my OH is pregnant and has stuffled mentally throughout it , just been diagnosed with prenatal / antenatal depression.
Just to make matters worse (she feels as though it's the end of the world) a scan has shown the baby to be on the 95th centile, this has added a spanner in the works as she's convinced it's her fault (even though she's barely eaten since she found out) she constantly talks about the fact it's apparently big from a growth scan.
Can anyone share stories of what estimate of weight you were given and how big the baby was whether bigger or smaller.
She's 29 weeks almost now and baby was measuring between 31-32 weeks for different bits of its body.
Also she's having the GD test tomorrow repeated as it was inconclusive last week.
My 2nd baby apparently measured 9lbs at 30 weeks according to the midwife. He was 7lbs 10. My 3rd baby measured big too with the tape and from a growth scan and was 6lbs 5. I would take it all with a pinch of salt.
Hi there, congrats to you both on baby.
I had this particularly on my second pregnancy. DD was 1 week over and weighted 9lb4. DS, planned c section at 38 weeks, just over 8lbs.
With DS, they kept going on about how big he was but then one day a registrar said, look your both big (6ft4 and I'm 5ft7) you are not going to have a small baby.
They didn't do the GD test in the end, all was ok.
I don't believe what you eat makes the baby big, it takes what it needs. I think genes have an influence.
The scans can be plus or minus 20% I think, and of course the growth rate may change between now and delivery. My DS was on a higher centile and in the end was 9lbs 13oz after being 12 days overdue.
What is worrying her about having a larger baby? It's not something that is automatically a problem. My DS was just big, he didn't have any issues to do with his size and I didn't have gestational diabetes. Even if she does have GD, it's not her fault - some women just are unlucky and it's nothing to do with what they're eating.
I posted a lot when I was pregnant because my scans measured WAY ahead, much much bigger than 95th centile. The health professionals weren't worried but I was. I was worried that because I was small framed the baby would get stuck, or would have GD.
I received lots of advice and anecdotes about the scans often being incorrect and inaccurate. It seems like they very often are.
In the end my perfect baby was 11lbs of gorgeousness so he was big but he was and is very healthy and happy. Every ounce of him is perfect. He was born by C-Section.
What is it your partner is worried about exactly? What is there to be 'at fault' for? Growing a big healthy baby is generally a great thing (GD aside). The doctors worry about babies that are too small or not growing, not ones that are healthy and towards the upper end of what is a normal weight.
Rather than worrying about the baby, your partners mental health sounds much more concerning. Is she getting enough support to deal with this aspect of her health?
2nd and 3rd were all scanned due to having large first child who caused lots of damage on way out (position was bad and baby was 10lb)
I was told at 32 weeks I was looking at an 11lb+ baby and they did bone measurements etc (in order to plan for delivery CS) as it was I went 12 days over and DC was only 9lb 8. Smallest kid was third one, they told me I was looking at 10lb'er again and it was only 9lb at 9 days over, All based on scans/growth scans etc. Take it all with a pinch of salt.
I had a scan about a week before i had d.s it said 8lb 9 and he was 9lb2
With DS I had to have a growth scan and they told me he would be small. Between 4 and 5lbs. My bump consistently measured at 6 weeks too small.
He was 7lbs14....
Why was she offered a growth scan? It's not routine unless there's another risk factor. Growing a big baby is genetic IMO. I'm tiny now but was 9lb4 at birth (my mother was equally tiny), my son was the same, my DH and SIL were larger. (And 95% is still 'normal'!)
I had a scan two weeks before my baby was born and the estimated weight at 35 weeks was more than the actual weight two weeks later, so take with a massive pinch of salt.
The measurements the midwives do are even more unreliable than the scans and depend on the way the baby is lying.
Very inaccurate in my experience. All the scans for DC1 plotted them in the 75th centile. I had 4 scans towards the end of my pregnancy. DC1 was born 40+4 and weighed 6lb 3oz.
I've heard the +or- 20% thing a lot but for me, it was way more than 20% out, and at 4 separate scans by different sonographers at the end of my pregnancy. I've never been able to figure out how they got it so wrong!
I didn't have any growth scans but second DC was on the 95th centile when he was born. He was a week late, normal labour, normal birth, no stitches (2nd baby helped with that I think). He's still on the 95th centile (age 5). It doesn't mean anything but he's easy to spot in the class photo.
First estimated at 6lbs 5oz, born 5lbs 15oz. Second estimated 8.5lb, born 7lbs 7oz. They almost always over estimate by about 10%.
Really inaccurate - was told DD2 was going to be a whopper - he was 6lb 7 and actually wore "newborn" sizes whereas DD1 was 7lb 10 and went straight into 0-3 months.
In fact I only had 0-3 months and sent my Mum out to buy some smaller stuff as it was hanging off him.
Mine was inaccurate but the other way - was told 91/2 pounds and was 11 and 1/2 when born (by csection). However as a child is one of the smaller in the class. Is normal and bright and I think being big gave him a good start in life so your wife shouldn't see a big baby as a bad thing to be at fault for.
Thanks all I haven't read the replies yet as I'm out but appreciate all the replies, I'm going to read them and possibly show her later xx
Ps stuffled??? Lol that was a typo
Mine was accurate too. But for lots they're not.
Either way, it's not her fault. Nobody is to blame.
In my experience it wasn't the predictions weren't accurate. I had to have a growth scan at 37 weeks and they told me that the baby was already about 8lbs 4oz so I was thinking that by the time I reached term I would have a large baby!
As it happened I was overdue and had my baby at 42 weeks, weighing 7lbs 11oz.
Everyone is different I guess but from what I have read, the estimations can be very wrong!
I was told at 37 weeks that DD was 8lb 4 and she was born 9lb 3 a couple of weeks later, so accurate for us I think. It is not her fault though! They will test for GD because they have to, mine came back negative and hers probably will too.
Someone has to be on the 95th centile. Our DD's head measured over the 99th! It's the first of a long succession of opportunities for midwives and health visitors to bang on about centiles, which is unnecessary for the most part and only causes anxiety, IMO xx
My consultant told me that there was a 500g (i.e. 1lb) margin of error with estimated weight/size on scans. It's much more important what the trend of growth is. If the baby has been tracking the 95th centile then that's fine. If it was on the 9th a few weeks ago it would be more worrying.
I was big and I new I was going to have a big baby. Know one told me his weight but for my size he was massive on me. He ended up being 10lbs. Does she have a big protruding belly. I felt everything the day I gave birth a big weight came of me. Tell her not to worry that is the job of the midwife. My midwife earned as I came close to my due date. On the day I gave birth I had to make noise because I couldn't push him out I tried for 2 hours. From what happened after I demanded an assisted birth his placenta was soft and mushy it didn't need cutting off it fell off. I heard them all gasping I was relieved. If he was inside me for any longer anything could have happened. When he was out not a peep of distress.
I had the test as well and it came back negative. Tell her not to worry she and baby will be fine.
Around 34 weeks in each pg, I was told that both my babies would be over 9 pounds. One was 7lb 10 oz, one was 7lb 3oz. Both are extremely tall though, so if weight estimates are based on height, that might explain it a bit. I don't think prenatal weight estimates are really that accurate.
Join the discussion
Please login first.