to be fed up with hospitals changing due dates from scan results?

[Bogeyface]

Partly my own annoyance and partly someone elses.

I had mine changed by one day, just one day! But the hospital MW after my 12 scan insisted on changing it on the system and in my notes, why for the sake of one bloody day?! I have a school mum aquaintance that asked me if mine had been changed because hers has been changed 3 times in the same pregnancy, putting her at up to 2 weeks less pg than she knows she is at one point. It is now back to roughly (well within a week) to what it should be and she is really fed up with it.

I asked my lovely community MW about it and she said that no ones takes a mothers word for it anymore! She said that there have been several cases that she knows of anecdotally that have caused DNA tests after the baby has been born because the father wasnt around when the scan decided conception took place. She dealt with one personally where the father left the mother because there was no way on this earth he could have made her pg when the scan said he did as he was out of the country. She said that she often wonders how it worked out long term and her heart went out to the mother involved :(

I understand that technology has its uses but why the hell are these dates changed for every woman with no consideration of the fact that alot of us (not all, I know!) have a very good idea when we got pg? I know the exact day we had pg sex because we only did it once in 4 weeks thanks to illness and work! But if the scan decided it was actually a week before then my EDD would be changed regardless and that isnt right surely?

So AIBU to be pissed off at hospitals using scans to totally over ride pg mothers knowledge or am I missing some important fact?

PG insomnia has led to me lying awake pondering this and other things, so I may be back with some more AIBU soon! :o

Mine was changed several times from 17th to 14th and back again. ExDP and I had DTD on the Tuesday and Friday of the week we conceived so it was quite funny trying to guess which day we had conceived. But it was also a little annoying. DD was born on the 13th.

I know you say you know when you got pregnant, but sperm can hang about for up to a week so there is room for error in your method too.

Plus baby is term at 37 weeks and can stay put until 42 weeks with few appearing on the date. Loads of room for manoeuvre. Just be glad we have the technology to know roughly and tackle human error.

My great nan, in the 1930s was pregnant and knew her dates. The midwives thought she was less. She was left to go to 44 weeks when she knew she was 42 and was begging for help. The baby was huge and had died.

Sorry, don't mean to be morbid, just illustrating although sometimes out, scans are a life saver

I had mine changed by one day which was just irritating, but unlikely to affect any decisions. The bigger problem I've come across is early scans in pregnancies that I've miscarried being well behind my dates and sonographers wouldn't listen. So many stories on the MC boards of women not being believed and being in limbo for weeks after a MMC.

They changed my date at the 12 week scan. No big deal. But when you are induced at 41 weeks and its possibly nearer 43 weeks you give birth to a whale. At least I did. And I know that I got away lightly with a healthy (but enormous) baby. I hope they take more notice today, esp as they have changed the recommendation for older women not going too long.

My EDD jumped forward by a week from the cycle dates at the first scan, and then back another few days at the second scan. My cycles are all over the shop, so it was difficult for me to know exactly when conception occurred.

Potentially it could have made a massive difference to me as they were only prepared to let me go 1 week overdue due to another medical condition. One of my friends was induced at "42 weeks", even though she knew the exact date she had conceived, which only put her around 41. She went on to have a complicated EMCS

I am very very aggressive when it comes to scan dates. Many might shrug their shoulders that's fine but you can't guarantee you won't have a baby born at or just before 24 weeks. If their dates are wrong they legally able to allow the baby to die.
If you feel strongly that they are wrong kick up a fuss, we came near to involving Solicitors when my hospital caved and changed the date.
It was no use in the end but its not something you should have to worry about when your body is threatening pre viable labour.

The dates thing really hacked me off, as my babies always measure big at the 12 week scan, so they always shift the due date forward by about 3 days. Doesn't make a huge difference until the end when we are thinking about scheduling induction by 40+14. As both my due dates have been Sundays, the induction is booked in for 40+11, which is actually only 40+8 by my correct dates (DC2 definitely was made on a specific date!), and if I want to fight the due date, I have to schedule a separate appointment with the doctor to fight my case!

Thankfully both times, baby has arrived just before the induction date, but it's a whole extra stress I could do without, though it does speed up the sweep date...

Plus I do not know where the research is that shows that baby size at the 12 week scan is the best way of assessing conception time. Total b*llocks...

Lol. It's not as if the foetus pays attention to what scans say. DC's femur length consistently gave an EDD two/three weeks earlier than the rest of the measurements. Foetuses have cells that grow into things; cells have their own schedule

littlebairn and other, if your EDD says eg 23wks but baby is born looking like 26wks, I doubt any doctor is going to pay attention to the notes and walk away based on a scan result from 12 weeks ago rather than look at what the baby in front of them looks like. They will always make an effort if baby might make it.

My measurements at the 12 week scan were a few days out on the 7 week dating scan . They told me that the dates should never be changed as the earlier scan is far more accurate in it's calculation of conception than any of the subsequent scans.

moxon but if its a shorter period of say a week then the size may not be all that obvious. I spoke to the most senior members of management they were very clear if my DD was born even a day before 24 weeks she was not to be helped they would leave her to die.
Hence further meetings were had and they were aware we were taking legal advice they caved in because the sonographer admitted that she was uncertain of date DD was in an awkward position. This songrapher was very aware that I had already had a pre viable baby and dates were very important.

lb it's good to take the precautions like you did, so not criticising that aspect. But I still believe that when faced with one sonographer's report (and knowing through years of experience that EDD do not always correspond to size) on the one hand, and faced with a newborn showing the clear potential of viability on the other, that the doctors will make the effort. Doctors aren't evil and looking for reasons to let premature babies die if it looks good and the parents are happy for them to try knowing the risks of potential disabilities etc due to prematurity.

I had mws arguing with me over a discrepancy of a couple of days which should have been no big deal but I know I tend to go overdue and didn't want to be pressured into induction before 42 weeks. When I pointed out that I knew when I had ovulated and had sex (one time in 2 weeks as dh had been away) the mw shrugged and said we always go by the scan dates and she wasn't prepared to discuss it further Cue lots of pressure and unnecessary monitoring until my healthy "overdue" baby popped out at a perfectly average weight covered in vernix.

I had IVF, so we knew the exact moment sperm and egg met! They still moved my EDD by 3 days

Lol Suffolk, pickles. Cells will do what cell will do.

My EDD was done by scan despite ivf baby. I think that is ridiculous. I suppose it is possible but very very unlikely (especially in some cases) that the dates are incorrect.
Ivf babies tend to be early and DD was a few days early.
Especially as all babies are different sizes
It seems scary when you think of going overdue or premature that tge accuracy of a sonographer can make so much difference.

I know this is a zombie thread but I just wanted to say how bloody disempowering it is to have mws/consultants disbelieving you at such an early stage in the pregnancy! I was given loads of leaflets on the choices I could make for antenatal testing, monitoring, place of birth, pain relief etc but for them to then tell me that they couldn't trust the information I gave them despite me showing them that I was informed made me feel like I couldn't trust them to respect my choices. I think that this creates a situation where women feel unsafe which inhibits their oxytocin production and actually causes them to go overdue!

Where we are they only adjust EDD if the scan is wildly different (at least a week) from dates. Or if the woman has just guessed at dates for whatever reason. The later in pregnancy it is done, the less accurate is I'm told.

I delivered at either 36+6 or 37+1. We went for the 'not preterm, thanks' option.

I have been thinking the same recently. I know exactly when I ovulated (charting) and for various boring reasons I know the egg was fertilised in a 12 hour window. Now if my date is changed if makes no real difference unless they try to use it as a reason to induce me early. That will be really annoying

Cheesybadger- sperm can hang around but your egg doesn't does it? (That's a genuine qu not bring sarcastic!) my understanding is the egg travels down in a set routine unless penetrated by sperm

I wonder how many unnecessary inductions are performed

My second baby was induced at 7 days late [by their incorrect dates] I knew my last period dates and roughly when I had conceived [one time we had sex that month due to illness and various factors] and my dates were originally calculated by that, they changed the due date at my 12 week scan, my baby was born after induction, covered in vernix, he was a large long baby, but clearly not overdue.

At my 12 week scan with my first baby, they changed the date by a week, despite the fact that I had IVF. Luckily for me the consultant thought this was ridiculous and changed it back.