If you were predicted to have a giant baby, how big were they when born?

[SheABitSpicyToday]

I was told my baby is already 6.5 pounds at 32 weeks! They reckon by 37 weeks he’s going to be well over 9pounds and are pushing for a csection. I have gestational diabetes which I’m now taking meds for so hoping that will slow him down a bit but I really really don’t want a csection if I can help it and want to see about induction at 37 weeks.

My daughter was predicted to be big but she was 7 pounds at 37+5.

What would you do in my situation?

You'll hear loads of people saying that they often get the measurements wrong. And sometimes they do.
BUT do you really want to ignore the advice given by medical professionals and try and birth a very large baby?
For what it's worth, my second child was measuring very large (I didn't have gestational diabetes- I just make large babies). Everyone was telling me that they always get the measurements wrong.
But I went with the advice from the professionals and had him a week early via c-section. He was nearly 10 pounds.
The c-section was a much calmer way of delivering my baby as opposed to my first birth (also a large baby) which was bloody awful.
Don't ignore nhs professionals just because someone from Mumsnet knew someone who's midwife / sonograhpher got the measurements wrong.

I had GD and a breech baby, the reason for C section was mainly down to the GD making baby very sleepy and a high chance of intervention.

Due to my GD being uncontrollable even on insulin and metformin my girl was a C section at 34 weeks. The breech side just added another issue as they couldn’t get her to manually move due to being so sleepy.

My girl weighed 5lb15oz

No one predicted anything for me but DC3 was 9lb 9oz and he also came very quickly, as in an hour after I arrived at hospital. I didn’t have time for an epidural or anything.

It was a bit of a shock as DCs1&2 were both 8lb and took many many hours to be born (both back to back).

Both my babies were predicted to be large - over 10lbs. No GD with either.

The first, my waters went at 36 weeks. I had the contractions induced and she was born 4 hours later at 6 lbs 13 oz.

The second was predicted to be bigger. I was actually placed into a clinical trial for those with large predicted birth weights, as there is currently no clinical evidence to suggest whether an early induction is better for reducing birth complications. I was placed into the "natural" group, but convinced my consultant to induce at 39 weeks. Again, I delivered in 4 hours at 10 lbs 2 oz.

No drugs with either other than gas or air. The labours were pretty identical, although my first labour was probably more difficult as she was back to back and I had to stay on my back, whereas with my second I was up and moving around. I pushed for a bit longer with my first, as I didn't think it was too bad. I wanted the second over and done with as it stung a bit more, so there were a couple less pushes. Overall though, both were manageable.

I had some slight grazing after the first, and a tear after the second.

I was like you and did not want a section. No one pushed me for this though and I was told size was not a reason for a section. Not sure if the GD impacts this though. I went in with an open mind, and knew that if it came to it I'd do what I had to for my baby and have the section if it was needed. I wanted to try a VB though and no one was pushing me for anything else.

I'd say both births were fine. Just try to be open minded and see why they might be pushing a section in your case.

I was told dc was going to be >9 lbs and I should be induced or have a c section. He was born naturally at 39 weeks + 4 weighing 8 lbs 15 oz

Mine was predicted at at least 10lbs but they expected him to be bigger. I had a growth scan at 38 weeks where they estimated him at 9lbs 13oz. He was born at 39+3 at 8lbs 11oz

I was delivered 2 weeks early with my "supersize" baby and went into complete panic. She was 7lb 7oz.........

They did say though that my placenta was around double the size it should have been.

Mine was estimated to be over 10. They pushed for induction from 38w. I refused until he was a week late. He was born by emcs at 10 days late. 9lb3. The section was required because labour just didn't progress. Nothing to do with his size, my body just wouldn't go into labour.

A friend and I measured almost identically through pregnancy and were told our babies would be about 10 pounds. Mine was 7lb 4oz, hers was 11lb 3oz! Funnily enough they were exactly the same weight at 12 months old.

I was terrified when I first went into labour because a few days before a doctor had referred to the baby as a "gorilla' that might be hard for someone of my small frame to deliver. In the end she weighed 6lb 10oz which seemed like a perfectly reasonable weight for someone of my build. Although she was two weeks early so might have been on the large size if she had gone to term or longer.

I had GD and was induced because the baby was a bit big apparently. She was 5lb 4

I had an emergency section and my baby was 10,3. Predicted to be 7 ish lbs and only went to emergency section due to struggling to progress which lead them to scan and realise he was breach, back to back and sizeable.
Despite having an unplanned emergency section and obviously not wanting to recommend the stress of that route, if I were you I'd be tempted to hold if in the hope of a natural delivery as clearly they don't always arrive at predicted size.

One of my babies was going to be massive. Was 6 1/2 pounds

They estimated about 9lb, but he was 7lb 10oz.

The fact that it's your second after a successful first induction should make a difference. I made the call for a second induction in those circumstances and DD's delivery was a relative dream. I don't know about the implications of GD for induction vs CS though.

4th child estimated between 10 and 11lb was 10lb6
5th child estimated 9-10lb was 6lb8
So can be correct other times can be way off I would say take what they say on board but ultimately its your baby your birth your choice xx

My daughter was predicted to be over 10lbs! I was over due by 10 days but when she was born she was 8lbs 13

GD here and following scans was estimated two giant babies so was induced early with them both.
Both induced at 38wks - DS was 8lbs 3oz and DD was 6lbs 8oz. Both very average babies.

My inductions were textbook, both absolutely perfect and beautiful births. I had an epidural with both (just in case a CS was needed) and experienced zero pain, but could feel to push. Up walking about within an hour or so and home the same day. No tears or injuries.
I'd never have a CS unless absolutely needed. Major surgery would need to be absolutely necessary.

A friends son was predicted to be 10lb. He was 6lb. Massive difference! I'd take these predictions with a pinch of salt.

Huge bumps for each of mine, no GD - measured 52" circumference with the first who was predicted to be 8lbs but ended up lying diagonally so EMCS and weighed in at long and slim10lb 5.5oz. Number 2 predicted to be 8-9lbs, full labour, got stuck, EMCS weighed 10lb 6oz! He had very wide shoulders which had stuck in my apparently narrow pelvic opening (child bearing hips!). No 3 planned C section, didn't estimate weight, 10lb 7oz of chunky adorableness. No 3 is now the shortest, other 2 are same size but slim/chunky as when they were born

I think it's right to take the measurements with a pinch of salt - but if you have gestational diabetes then it's probably correct that your baby might be larger than average. I am surprised to hear that they are recommending it but I'm not an expert and I've no idea how or why they make their recommendations. Have you asked why they recommend it?

My second baby was 9lb5oz and I'm fairly small. His head was out within minutes (but it was my second - the first took a lot longer) but his shoulders did get stuck and I had to be cut to pull him out. He didn't suffer any long term effects, just a small amount of bruising along his collar bone and down his arm. I still would have gone for the vaginal birth with the benefit of hindsight because I think I'd have found recovering from a c-section to be much worse than the episiotomy. My mother's first was 9lb4oz and her second was 10lb10oz and managed to give birth to both naturally with no issues. There's really no way to know for definite what will happen in birth.

Oh, and I think I'd go for a c-section if I were to have another since they seem to be getting quite a bit bigger each time. I'd be concerned about more serious injuries to the baby if they were to be even bigger and get stuck again.

Have they predicted a big baby from the midwife feeling them alone then? Or have you had growth scans to predict the weight?
I only ask because I always measure big when I go to see the midwife. 91st centile for my first but when she came out she was on the 9th centile when born! Second was charted on the 98th centile but was around the 50th.
I have the same issue now with my 3rd. The midwife is measuring baby on the top centile lines whereas my growth scans are charting baby between the 10th and 20th centile.
If it was through scans I would be inclined to believe the accuracy but if you haven't had one could you request one?

i had no indication that they would be large but my first was 11.3 and the second was 10.11 both born with forceps - i had an epidural as am epileptic but other than that it was fine

My ‘going to be at least 10lbs’ baby was all of 7lbs when he finally arrived at 40+10. He had incredibly long legs though which they said probably skewed the prediction.