Talk

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.

Are extra scans really necessary due to a high BMI????

(10 Posts)
happyfaces Wed 05-Aug-09 10:52:12

Hello All!

So, I went to my first OB appointment yesterday and the only thing they said was that my bloods etc were fine but I would need extra scans at 28 and 34 weeks to measure my baby and "make sure it was growing" because my high BMI would make abdominal measuring difficult/inaccurate.

Is this true? Does anyone else have experience of this. Certainly, if the baby is growing, I will grow??? I admit I love seeing the baby on the screen and seeing that all is okay in there but am truly hesitant to have extra scans which are not essential

(have had an early scan, dating scan and am scheduled for an anomaly scan - so that's already one scan more than I would like!)

Feel a bit confused as what would be best to do... any thoughts appreciated.

LoveBeingAMummy Wed 05-Aug-09 10:54:53

Is it the extra scan or the reason why that concerns you most?

Remember some people don't get bigger when pregnant so the size of the mums tummy doesn't always show.

KnockedUpDelf Wed 05-Aug-09 10:56:05

I am a chubber and I think my big belly means that it can be hard to tell what is baby and what is me if you are just looking from the outside.

Scans don't hurt the baby at all, I had a few extra with my son.

Besides it means you get some extra sneak peeks at your baby.

MrsBadger Wed 05-Aug-09 11:00:56

are you in the US?

if your BMI makes you 'high risk' you may get asked for extra scans to check placental sufficiency as part of the routine high-risk scheme, but don't know enough re BMI issues to know if the measurement thing is routine.

TeamEdward Wed 05-Aug-09 11:03:31

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

happyfaces Wed 05-Aug-09 11:05:48

It's the extra scans and not the reason why which concerns me. I know I am overweight and that comes with it's own risks. And I have to say, everybody has been lovely regarding my weight in that they have told me the risks but in no way made me feel bad or inadequate and I really appreciate that.

But I do have some reservations regarding ultrasounds and neurological development... I know it is a contentious issue but I feel conflicted over it. In addition to this I keep reading these US studies linking extra ultrasounds to greater incidents of "Intrauterine Growth Retardation" which I guess means the baby isn't growing as it should, which seems a bit worrying since the scans are supposed to make sure the baby is growing okay. There's just so much information and I don't know what I think about this yet. What did they do with overweight mums before ultrasounds?

TeamEdward Wed 05-Aug-09 11:09:19

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

YanknCock Wed 05-Aug-09 22:58:12

Interesting....I've got a high BMI, but never got extra scans (am 37 weeks now).

I didn't get a bump till around 24 weeks, and even then, if people didn't know me they probably wouldn't have picked out I was pregnant until 28 weeks. Now there is no doubt!

Portofino Wed 05-Aug-09 23:11:15

I had high BMI when PG but had problem free Pregnancy. I certainly was sent for a late scan when about 35 weeks as measuring large for dates but that was it since 20 week scan. It went a bit tits up after that as Polyhydramnious and breech.

But still scans won't hurt baby! I still remember the one I had the week before dd was born. You could see her face and she was a proper full grown baby! I was so impatient to see her....

curiositykilled Wed 05-Aug-09 23:12:32

They like to measure the babies is all. This can indicate any problems that need may treatment. They want to scan my non-id boy/girl twins at 28 and 34 weeks for the same reason - feel they can't measure the size of each baby through exam.

They didn't pick up my first was quite underweight through exam (6lb 5 oz at 40+6, I am well built and 5' 7") and then diagnosed through exam and scan that my second was small for gestational age when she was 7lb at 40+3 (not small for gestational age by any stretch. I'm not sure either scanning or examining is particularly accurate but this is a perfectly reasonable suggestion for them to make.

You could always refuse it but I feel quite lucky to get extra chances to see my babies on a scan. wink I'm not sure there's much in any fears over damage from ultrasound and 4 in 40 weeks isn't likely to be much worse than 2. Could just be that extra scans cause over diagnosis of IUGR, also most ppl offered extra scans have multiple pregnancies where IUGR is more likely.

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