to think that we can't actually tell how big a baby is going to be?

[allhailtheaubergine]

1. I have lost count of the number of women who are told that they have "a very big baby in there" by various medical professionals, and then go on to have a perfectly average sized baby.

1. Even to the point of scans and monitoring and preparations for c-sections because the baby is SO BIG... and then a lovely little 7lb baby arrives via the traditional channels.

1. And people have to have a lucozade / glucose test thing for diabetes because they are "measuring big" and then go on to have demonstrably not particularly big babies.

1. You can't look at something and know how heavy it is. Scanning is looking. Big babies are weighed. What if they are small and dense? Or big and less dense?

1. And anyway, weighing is a silly way of determining what is a big baby and what isn't. What about head circumference? Shoulder width? Length?

Am I being a total arse (AIBATA) ? Or is predicting the size of babies a fairly inexact science?

My midwife said I should prepare myself for a larger than average baby, but was hazy on how much baby would weigh. She turned out to be a whopping 9lb 10oz.
I had a huge bump and then delivered a huge baby! (c-section in the end)

We guessed, but I had growth scans at 35 then 37 wks and basic calcs from there turned out to be correct. But we had been freaked out by people intimating that dd was too small hence the scans, when in fact it was very low amniotic fluid leading to the discrepancy, glad they picked it up though.

When I was pregnant with DD I asked the MW how big she would be. She refused an answer.

SIL was told she would have a huge baby and turned out to have a baby of just over 5lbs.

But I don't know the answer to your question.

You tell me, I obviously don't know, is it more encouraging to be told your baby is big? Does it make it sound healthier? Could that be why they do it.

Forgive the reminiscence. A woman in my office who was up to my chin, and I'm only 5 ft 8, and slender with it, (I mean she was, not me, I wish) had a ten-pound baby. And not by CS. Ouch.

I keep being told my baby will be "huge" as I have a "huge" bump although MW says bump is measuring exactly right for dates. It is really, really annoying me. Will let you know if he is big, small or just right when he arrives in about 7 weeks :)

My midwife (very old and experienced) had a game of guessing babies birth weight. With dd1 she said 6.7 to 7lb. DD was 6.12.

With dd2, she said 7 to 7.7lb. Dd2 was 7lb 3oz.

But thats just anecdotal evidence!

My understanding is that a good old feel around by an experienced doctor or midwife is as accurate as a scan when it comes to predicting birthweight.

I was told I was carrying a 'good sized' baby with my first. She was 9lbs 6oz. Second baby I was told was over 10 lbs following multiple scans. He was 11lbs. Third baby I was told was same as second at scan, but he was only 9lbs 3oz.

HP never claim it (or a least shouldn't) that it is accurate

"5. And anyway, weighing is a silly way of determining what is a big baby and what isn't. What about head circumference? Shoulder width? Length?"

This is all taken into account too. The scans and shows you on a scale where you baby is on the pecentile charts.

I was the other way. I had a scan 2 days before a DD1 was born and they said she was around 8lbs. She was 10lb 7oz.
DD2 was 2oz smaller but I had a HUGE bump with DD3 ( measured 52 weeks at 36 weeks pregnant) and it was generally assumed she was a whopper. I was even induced at 40+1 because I they were worried about her size and I was ill. She was big at 11lbs 10oz but her birth wasn't especially traumatic. It was funny watching them try to fit her in a 'fish bowl' when they though she might have to go into SCBU.
DS didn't appear particularly big at any of his scans but was a good size at 10lbs 13oz.

I agree.

My first DC - told by consultant he would be a whopper - 8lb
2nd DC - large for dates - needed extra scans - 8lb
3rd DC - small for dates - needed extra scans - 8lb

Apparently I only produce 8lb babies

When you scan a baby you measure various dimensions and are measuring its size. Size correlates to weight quite well in babies (and most adults barring muscle bound athletes).

I was informed I was having a 'huge' baby, 'well over 9lbs' and was practically 'commiting suicide by home birth' by the cunt consultant. I had a 6lb-er!

YANBU - I would trust an experienced midwife's guess over a consultants measurements any day.

Dd2 was apparently going to be well over 11lb so I was induced at 38 weeks, she was 7lb!!!!

Im getting worried. Im 37 weeks and have been told I have a "whopper" of a baby (7lbs at 35 weeks) but no one has mentioned I should be induced early etc...

I measured big on and off depending on who measured me.

Had a 10lb 7oz baby! Didn't you hear me screaming?

I was told by very experienced midwife that ds1 would be about 8lb he was 7lb 12, she did this by palpation only didn't have a scan after 22 weeks. Dd was a different mw, she said dd was big, over 8lb, I said I didn't think so as at 39wks I could still take a full breath which I couldnt with ds, I was right, she popped out a very petite 6lb6oz

Erring on the side of caution maybe? As there are potentially difficulties delivering big babies. I measured exactly right or a week behind for dates all through both my pregnancies and mine were 9lb10 and 9lb 4. DH and I are both 5ft4. Measuring for dates is just as arbitrary as guessing or scans imo as someone else measuring right for dates could have a 6lb or a 10lb baby. Although having said that, I have known people have problems picked up through measuring small for dates, eg not enough fluid. I suppose it's true of so many things in pregnancy and birth care, it's a lot of guesswork!

I was told DS would be between 7.5 lbs and 8.5lbs. I nearly fained when I was told he ws 10 lb 3... My health visitor used to brag about it at the Mum and baby club she ran, which I attended.

Although, where my midwife is concerned, she didn't test me for diabetes, didn't plot my bump height measurements properly, and it became a running joke in the pub where I worked that I was having twins.

I have seen a few programs filmed in us where obs are recommending induction at 38 weeks because of a big baby in case of shoulder dystocia, which I admit is a very serious complication, but their definition of a big baby is anything over 8lb it would seem. Don't know how accurate this is, could just be tv exaggeration, but I would be seriously unimpressed to have to be induced, run the risk of a cascade of interventions for a fairly average sized baby. I don't consider a baby to be really big until it hits the 10lb mark, and there's a mighty big size difference between 8 and 10lb!

cantpooinpeace... xposted with you...

I think I heard you, btw... Scream qquieter, next time... I didn't make that much fuss...

Mine weighed almost exactly what the fundal height measurement had predicted 4 days earlier, so it was accurate for me!

Oh and on point 5, my 20 week scan (the latest I had), showed head circumference on the 91st centile and that's what it was when he was born! He was a big baby born at home, but no-one ever suggested it was risky - the midwife just told me my pelvis was big enough to cope!

I was told my baby would be "about 8 pounds"

He was 10lb 4oz.

Next one was 10lb 5oz!

So I don't have much faith in their ability to assess the size of a baby, no