Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to make the hospital consultant laugh out loud...

62 replies

Babieseverywhere · 21/02/2012 17:20

Consultant was expressing her surprise that I didn't have any growth scans in previous pregnancies and asked me why I didn't want any in this pregnancy and I replied

"Why does it make babies smaller"

She laughed a lot and I gave her my real answer, which is I prefer to avoid scans unless there was a medical need for one. Happy to stick to 12 and 20 weeks scans as standard. As my first three babies were reasonable sizes, my current baby won't be tiny, I don't need a scan needed to tell me that !

OP posts:
Original poster
Babieseverywhere · 21/02/2012 18:39

It was a poor joke to start off with Grin

OP posts:
Original poster
Babieseverywhere · 21/02/2012 18:44

"Have you asked them how they will be reconciling the need for CFM with you being in a birth position which allows the pelvis to open up and gives you the best chance of a straightforward vaginal delivery."

Yes, they looked blankly at me and repeated the need for continuous monitoring. It is written down in one of their policies, therefore they know think it is law. They are policy mad at my hospital.

Not decided yet, whether to be monitored intermittently to allow me to move OR just wait until an ELCS is offered when I get overdue again. I'll have to see how things are nearer the time.

Does make me laugh that they tell me that shoulder dystocia is such a problem with big babies and then force me to labour on my back which of course is the worse position for encouraging shoulder dystocia problems !

OP posts:
Northernlurker · 21/02/2012 18:51

It is amusingly daft isn't it? I looked at our hospital policy for women with high BMI in labour recently. Not only is CFM mandated but they also want you to have a consultation with anesthetics beforehand, have a cannula in as soon as you hit the labour ward and give strong consideration to having an epidural too. Wow - all fantastic procedures if you end up with a baby in distress and needing a c-section - and of course all that lot makes it all the more likely you will end up with that!

If I were doing the whole thing again (which I'm not) I would probably accept the cannula as having had something of a PPH with dd3 I would be keen for them to have good access in case that was needed. The rest of it would be declined.

LaBoccaDellaVerita · 21/02/2012 18:54

Anyone with a spare few minutes care to explain the 'joke' to me? Only I'm just not ROFL yet and I wonder if there's something I'm not getting?

Original poster
Babieseverywhere · 21/02/2012 19:07

I was being silly, pointing out to the consultant that having a growth scan would not affect my baby's weight.

i.e. "Why. Does [having a growth scan] make babies smaller ?"

She laughed, as of course scans wouldn't make my baby lighter or heavier. Scans 'do' nothing.

Hence my point, why bother having them. Unless concerned about growth or blood flow, i.e. medical need.

OP posts:
GrittersWifeAndProud · 21/02/2012 19:14

Oooh I was 8lb 12oz when I was born! :)

My nephew was 9lb 12oz and my DD was 7lb 12oz. Freaky eh? :o

lisad123 · 21/02/2012 19:17

They don't work well in my opinion. They told me dd1 was going to be 7.5lb, she was 5lb at term and dd2 told she would be 8lb she was 5lb 2!! Confused

Original poster
Babieseverywhere · 21/02/2012 19:18

Very freaky. So what do you reckon DC4's weight will be ? Worth a guess it would be nearly as accurate as a growth scan

OP posts:
Original poster
Babieseverywhere · 21/02/2012 19:20

X post with Lisa. Yep, not accurate. DC3 at 9lb 7oz was meant to be "well over 11lbs"

OP posts:
Tmesis · 21/02/2012 19:28

Mind you, my first two were 10lb5oz and 8lb15oz, then #3 was 6lb10oz. I think I even said something along the lines of "Bloody hell, it's two-thirds of a baby" when she came out.

Growth scans were actually spot on for the first two, but growth scan with #3 had her at around 7.5 - 8lb.

fabwoman · 21/02/2012 19:29

My growth scan saved my babies life.

fabwoman · 21/02/2012 19:30

babies

baby's

BillyBollyBandy · 21/02/2012 19:32

Well I thought it was funny, even without the punctuation Wink

Smithson6 · 21/02/2012 19:34

FWIW, I am a small person and had a ridiculously huge bump. People used to do double takes when they saw me. I couldn't breathe or sleep for the last month and was measuring 46" when the baby was born. No one suggested to me i was having a big baby (first baby so clueless) and I wasn't offered growth scans. She was 11 pounds. I had a long labour ending in a shoulder dystocia, and she nearly died. i would have liked a heads up personally.

Original poster
Babieseverywhere · 21/02/2012 19:34

fabwoman, Glad to hear it. As I said growth scans for a real medical need are a wonderful modern tool and I am very grateful we have that option, for when we need it.

Tmesis Wow, you give me hope that I am not destined to have a massive baby. Sub 7lbs, tiny baby size.

OP posts:
Original poster
Babieseverywhere · 21/02/2012 19:41

Smithson6, I am very sorry you suffered shoulder dystocia whilst labouring. What a scary time for you and your DD. :(

I am very surprised that your midwives didn't explain that a measure of 46" at 40/42 weeks would indicate a likely big baby (it was pointed out to me weekly). Your midwives should of talked to you especially as a first time mum who would be unaware of what the figures meant.

BillyBollyBandy, Yeah, someone got it ;)

OP posts:
CrystalQueen · 21/02/2012 19:42

A friend of mine was scared shitless by the consultant + scan telling her she was having a giant baby. He was about 7lbs.

Smithson6 · 21/02/2012 19:46

yup you would think so wouldn't you? people still go quiet if I show them the final bump picture. i. was. massive. i went to all my appointments and everything but I think my midwife was just a bit crap. Found out the other day that my partner's father was 12 pounds. And he is nearly eighty so his mother would have had limited pain relief. Shudder.

Smithson6 · 21/02/2012 20:08

Although thinking about it if I had known i was carrying a whopper, I would have been worried and anxious and then would probably have gone with the C section thing. So YANBU as I was very relaxed about the idea of giving birth. But then if i had gone with the C section thing I wouldn't have had the shoulder thing and the drama. But then I would have probably been all "oh no why did I agree to a C section?" thing, "I should have given it a go....." So probably Y are still NBU. Maybe. Gah.

slowburner · 21/02/2012 20:14

Midwives are always prepared for possible complications

You'd think wouldn't you? But no. Actually they are not. And they caused my daughter massive and non recoverable brain damage. If I had my time again I'd be ensuring that midwife got some serious retraining.

As for th growth scans they don't mean bugger all anyway. I've yet to gear about one which is even reasonably accurate. Good luck with the birth, I agree they should probably be prepared, midwives don't always know what they are doing.

Kayzr · 21/02/2012 20:14

I have been told I need growth scans as DS2 was 10lb 5oz. I will probably have them to keep them happy so I get my home birth. But I have heard that they can be 1lb out each way.

So you can be told the baby will be 8lb 3oz and then end up either 7lb or 9lb.

So the point exactly is what?

theDevilHasTheBestMNNames · 21/02/2012 20:30

My reading round the topic was they can be out be 1 lb either way - the one off scans are particularly unreliable but a series of scans is better.

Justs looked around and one of the places I read this:

"Yet in 1988, Miller, Brown, Khawli, Pastorek & Gabert in "Ultrasonographic identification of the macrosomic fetus" found that the typical mean error ranges from 300 to 550g (11.6 to 19.4 oz). That's around a WHOLE POUND!"

at
www.bigbaby.org.uk/are_estimates_of_weight_accurate.html

Has a page about the supposed benefit of having a large baby - which I found nice to read when everyone was acting like my between 9 to 10 lb were freaks.

GrittersWifeAndProud · 21/02/2012 20:30

DPs SIL was told at 30wks her DS already over 9lbs and was going to be a monster, so she gave away her entire stock of size 1 nappies. He was 8lbs 2oz.

zipzap · 21/02/2012 20:34

If you want an elcs then why not try saying you will have them in preparation for an elcs so will be there for them once they have authorised your elcs :o

4madboys · 21/02/2012 20:37

i got your joke Grin

and i refused extra growth scans as well, my babies were 8lb 7oz, 9lb 3oz, 9lb 5oz and 10lb 13oz for the 4 boys and then dd who they said would be big, was a whopping... 8lb exactly...

the consultant was most put out that i didnt have extra scans for dd, he said to me if i had a baby that was 9lb or more then i would NEED a c section (i am 5 2 and small) i did point out to him that had he READ my notes he woudl see that i had delivered all of my previous babies naturally with no intervention adn that ds4 was almost 11lb and delivered in the birth pool, so why iwould need a section for baby no 5 if she was big i have no idea... he then said that i had just been lucky! or it could be as the midwives had said each time i birthed easily that actually i have a good pelvis for childbirth (and yes that is just luck) but why i suddently wouldnt be able to deliver a big baby having done so 4 times previously i have no idea Confused and she wasnt big anyway which i KNEW, as i could tell she didnt feel as heavy as my previous babies, but obviously they insisted i was wrong.