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

Ha, changing due dates annoyed me too. My DSs were both IVF babies. I knew the point of conception and implantation down to THE HOUR and it was all in my notes yet the MW still tried to tell me I was wrong about the date of conception and moved it a week.

I knew the point of conception and implantation down to THE HOUR

Surely you knew the hour the embryo was put inside you, but did you actually know the time it implanted? Implantation could be 4/5 days later.

That depends.
How many days old embryo or blastocyst is.

Up to 5-6 days old. If its put back day 6 that is when implantation would usually start. (Day6)
Not leaving a lot of time for error also some people then test every day and you could theoretically get a positive day 8.
But either way if you have a 6 day old blast and test by the test day 16 thats only 10 days.

You get bothered about this?!
My baby was IVF so I had a pretty accurate time let alone date for fertilisation! Though even then who knows when she implanted?
They changed my EDD by one day.
You really really need to get out more and find some real problems if you care about your date moving one day!!!

Even if you had sex once, you can only give an earliest possible date of conception, not the only date.

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.

This was me!
Well DH didn't actually leave me, but the principle is the same.
I was pretty positive when I had ovulated as we were TTC.
The scan pushed my date back by 11 whole days! They kept telling me that the scans were very accurate etc but if they were right, it was a Christmas miracle as DH wasn't even home that week.

As it happens when DD2 was born one day before the due date set by the hospital but 10 days later than my date, she was not only big (10lbs) but very long, with loads of hair, incredibly dry skin and very long fingernails. The midwives agreed she was probably nearer 42 weeks than 39+6. However the technology was not to be argued with.

I had exactly the same experience, dates changed at every scan. In the end they had me conceiving two weeks before my last period. I don't understand why they kept doing it as he measured small (still is, only 9th centile).
I was induced at 38 weeks due to GD and my age, I kept saying their dates were wrong but they wouldn't listen - being my first child and having lost two previously I didn't argue as hard as I now wish I had. Upshot being it was a failed induction, followed by an emcs, he was a tiddler with no suck reflex - wouldn't breast or bottle feed so had to be tube fed. Feeding was a nightmare, never managed to establish breast feeding and bottles were a struggle - to be honest I struggled until he was weaned.
Amazingly on the birth notes, they seem to change their minds and showed him being induced at 35 weeks!

"Surely you knew the hour the embryo was put inside you, but did you actually know the time it implanted? Implantation could be 4/5 days later."

That's not the relevant point for dating - it's when sperm meets egg, as it is from that point that the embryo starts dividing and developing. Obviously it needs to implant for there to be a pregnancy, but conception happens before implantation. And in an IVF cycle, you know to within a few hours when that has happened.

Serenity - you could have sex on Monday, sperm swimming about then fertilised on Sunday when you produce an egg. It waits about for the egg

With DS1 my dates were changed 3 times, I know the exact time we had the pg sex and was also using ovulation sticks so know that I didn't ovulate late/early.

It put DS1 2 weeks ahead of when I knew the date (and was originally confirmed to be as well) and I was induced at 38 weeks, if you go by my original date, that would have been about 36 weeks and he was pretty small at 6lb 1oz.

My DS2' dates stayed the same, he was born at 35 weeks having stopped growing a bit earlier at 4lb 8oz, so it seems reasonable to think that I was right the first time!

That's what I mean cheesy badger- so if you're predicting conception based on knowing when the egg was released it doesn't matter how long the sperm that fertilised it was hanging around?

YANBU! This happened to me, but we had IVF so I was pretty sure of the dates.

The hospital couldn't get their heads around it when I was tryin to explain that any change of dates is worrying, as its a growth issue rather than me getting my dates wrong!

I had IVF with a 5 day blastocyst and none of the medics would take any notice of that info in calculating dates. My due date was pulled back by a week, which could have caused me a great deal of trouble as it would have meant I couldn't give my employer the official notice with enough time. DH was about the lack of knowledge the people who looked after us seemed to have of statistics and forecasting. His own prediction was very accurate!

The hospital isn't changing your dates.
The clinicians are using the information available via your scans to update your records.
Maybe it should go like this:
Pregnant woman "im 8 weeks pregnant and due at new year."
Sonographer "your latest scan indicates you are 9 weeks pregnant and due at Christmas. But hey, we'll go with your dates as its still the festive season"

Good luck. Congratulations on your pregnancy.

I found that my due date was first calculated using lmp and a 28 day cycle. I knew that wasn't right as I had used ovulation predicting sticks, but it was ignored.

Then a pretty reasonable date was selected based on 8 week scan.

Then moved 1 day at 12 week scan (not bothered as only 1 day) and my consultant said we'd use that.

At my 20 week scan (20+2 by the previously agreed date) various measurements were taken. The woman putting them into the computer (not sure what her job title is) declared the baby to be measuring 20+6 and printed out some graphs showing where the baby falls on centiles for 20+6. Unsurprisingly the baby is spot on average for 20+6, given that she used those same measurements to come up with the 20+6 date. It was so shockingly illogical (and only a few days) that I didn't say anything.

There are tables of centiles for scan measurements. For example, the table in this article shows that for a crown-rump length of 54mm the 50th centile (so the date you are given) is 12+0. But for the 5th centile this is 11+2 and the 95th 12+4. That is a big spread and there are still 10% outside those dates.

My twins were dated two days apart at my first scan and two weeks apart on the last scan.

They both arrived on the same day

Which was not the day calculated by the midwife, using some archaic 'nine calendar months and one week' technique This was 3 days out from the usual number of days method, but thankfully, irrelevent in the end. They came a little early, but not early enough for it to be important.

Clearly there is a case for them ignoring dating scan in ivf situations it would just cause confusion.
And using the data in reverse would help tell them how babies actually grow (ivf ones at least).
Also if the size is then used for nuchal tube info the correct 100% date should be used for accuracy not a reverse your baby is x size so must be so many weeks and days old.

I think most people would then understand that ivf is different to even iui or ovulation testing where the dates could be out.

Possibly ivf babies should be dated (just in case of a strange anomoly) but then really consider why the baby might be exceptionally tall or short.

Just because you had sex on a given day does not mean that was day of conception, sperm live a few days

Yes, sperm can live up to a week if the conditions are right.

Practically speaking, can you imagine having to go on the mother's word? Some women have no idea, some women have it wrong, some women are lying due to paternity reasons. You'd be taking a gamble with whether the baby was too early or too late. The safest and easiest to know when delivery should be for a healthy baby is by scan.

Induction for late babies is a relatively recent thing. My friend was 4 weeks late and was never induced. I have a few cousins that were over 2 weeks late. My family was a bit surprised when I told them the deadline was 42 weeks, instead of letting labor come naturally.

But to your point, moving due dates by only a day is a bit silly. A day is a guideline. Babies come in their own good time. Mine was a week early.

I can see how in the case of the lady who's DH had died, this would be really upsetting. And possibly for people that maybe are not in a trusting relationship.

But otherwise, count yourself lucky that's the only thing you're worrying about during your pregnancy!

Serenity - I see what you mean... Ovulation testing would show accurate dates I suppose. Unsure how long the egg journeys for and how far the sperm gets

My DD1 was IVF and I had had scans at 7, 8 and 11 weeks via the ACU that were correct. My care was then handed back to my local hospital for my 12 week scan and nuchal fold test when they decided that my dates were incorrect and DD1 was actually conceived a week and earlier. No amount of arguing that this was impossible could change their minds and my due date was changed in my notes. DD1 arrived at 41+1 according to them (40+1 according to my IVF cycle). This was an issue as I wanted a homebirth and I had to fend off lots of needless 'induction' conversations and go on maternity leave a week earlier than I had planned. So yes, it does happen and it does have implications.

Oh and and DD1 turned out to be on the 9th centile (where she has remained ever since and both her parents aren't big). Dating scans work on 50% average and medical professionals seem to forget about babies that might be a bit larger or smaller than this.

orange that's ridiculous. My baby is IVF too, but I haven't had any pushback when I have told people my dates.