Having a big baby and not sure what to do!

[babyox]

Hello there
Have never posted a question on mumsnet though have gleaned much helpful advice through my pregnancy. Am now 39 wks and living inthe states with DH. He was a big baby, 10'1 and had a growth ultrasound last week where they estimated baby is already 8'13. Baby is head down though not engaged..am not dilated, no effacing though cervix ripe-ish!!! Doc reckons because baby and body not making any changes sld be baby already too big to go down bith canal already (I am 5'4 and usually 140).
Am due sat 1st July and have an exam on wednesday and even if still no change they may induce before the baby becomes to big for a vaginal birth. Doc said if I want an elective cesarean they would happily approve...just dont know what to do. Would like a vaginal birth but dont want it to be traumatic for me and baby and may end up with an emergeny cesarean anyway so should I opt for elective. Worry I will feel cheated if I could have delivered naturally......Sorry this is such a rant!!!! Any advice wld be apprecaited particularly from anyone with any experience of delivering a big baby!!!
Thankyou baby Ox

well, for starters growth scans are notorious for being completely out.
And second, I don't think that there is any hard evidence that a large baby means a difficult labour is more likely. All my three were big (from 9lb 4 oz to 10lb) and I didn't have difficult deliveries. I've never even had a tear, and I'm not built like a brick sh*thouse, either.
I find it very odd that you're being offered an elective CS - I guess you being in the States explains why. You'd never be offered one here in the UK, nor an induction, just because the baby might be big. So proceed with caution.

With my first baby I was induced at 40+13 because overdue but also because they said the baby was 9lbish already and if I was left any longer I would probably be unable to deliver vaginally.

In fact, baby was 7lb 13.
At 40 weeks there was no sign of anything happening either. All my babies have been overdue. I assume they needed a little longer to cook

Don't know if that helps, but scans are not always accurate in the weight estimations. There is +/- percentage difference but I can't remember what it is.

friend of mine had a 13lber .. she's really skinny .. she came through fine .. I think it depends on pelvic size rather than your weight / height tbh

I personally had 2 electives and would recommend them

but only you could make the decision

I do know that US are quicker to section and that pre-guessing birth weight tends to be out a lot of the time

good luck, hope you get some real advice

DS1 was 10lb 1oz and I was offered induction and cs with DS2. He turned up early and 2lbs lighter than his brother but pretty much spot on with the grown scan a week earlier. DD was born smack on her due date, about 6 oz heavier than a growth scan 3 weeks before (and "only" 8;b 10oz). So, the scans aren't always accurate, as has been said..

How was your first delivery? Nightmare? Not so bad considering? Remember. You've already given birth to a huge baby. Assuming the scan is accurate and your baby is born close to term, that puts him at "only" a similar size to your first. (and I use the term "only" fairly loosely ) There's no reason to assum you'd have any more trouble giving birth to this baby than you did the first, and 2nd babies are generally easier.

As others have said the scans can be very inaccurate
I was told at 40wk scan that baby would be >9lb
He arrived at 42 wks without induction and was only 8lb

Why not wait and see if you go into labour naturally and see what happens then?

Assuming your baby is happy and healthy inside you for now why get him or her out early?

My mom had my bro naturally - she is 5 ft and he was over 10lb

2 of my 3 were over 9 lb, 1st was 9lb 13. had an episiotomy with no. 1 but nothing else. i asked to be induced with ds2 (who turned out to be only 8lb7) and they werent very happy about it but did agree. by the time i got to ds3 they were very against the idea and consultant told me it makes very little difference inducing a week or two early as the head only grows a matter of millimeters per week, the extra weight is fat which makes no difference to how difficult it is to give birth.

if you feel this strongly i would hold out for a natural delivery, but ask your mw what will happen if baby does get stuck so you are prepared. good luck, hope all goes well

Sounds like me! I am 5ft 5 and my first DD was 10lbs and got stuck.
I was offered an elective c-section, but decided only to go for it if I went 2 weeks over. They didn't want to induce me early as this may lead to more intervention and the possibility of the baby getting stuck again.
In the end I went into labour naturally and had a straightforward labour (DS was 10lbs too)
I was so pleased to have avoided a c-section.

I have noticed that this happens in the states. What they consider to be a big baby there we think is normal here. They truly think that it is almost impossible for a woman to give birth to a baby over 8 lbs, crazy!! I'm small like you and my last was 9lb 2oz and no problems atall. She didn't engage until I was in transition either!!

I love the fact that they have already fiddled with your cervix... so American... you may not know this but they are already managing you! It takes a strong character to give birth the way they choose in the US
You should read Ina May's guide to Childbirtrh -it's a US book wriiten by America's most famous midwife (in Tennessee)
And I agree with what everyone has said about inaccuracy of scans.... and also petite women delivering massive babies... it doesn't have to be a problem... but it will help if you can remain mobile in labour... and this isn't always a given in US hopsitlas.
Good luck!

hahaha. i am 5ft 3inches. and my dd2 was 9lb at birth. i had a tiny bump, she measured average on frowth scan, no-one was expecting mwe to have a 9lber. i delivered her with ease. i was upright during some of the labour, and it was quick.

dd1 was my tiny one at 6lb 15oz (IIRC) and that labour weas awful.

dd3 was induced 2 weeks warly due to gestional diabetes, and was 7lb 14oz, again very easy and quick.

just keep upright and as mobile as possible. i found rocking side to side helped with dd3. it was all instinctive.

Agree with most of what's been said here!

"Doc reckons because baby and body not making any changes sld be baby already too big to go down bith canal already" - this sounds like rubbish to me TBH - as far as I know they it's fairly rare for a baby to physically not be able to fit through the pelvis and in any case very hard to tell ahead of the labour. I suspect it's just easier for them to do an elective - which is fine if you want that, but sounds like you'd like to give vaginal a go.

In which case there are plenty of examples of women all shapes and sizes who have given birth to babies of all shapes and sizes. Pupuce is right - if they insist on constant monitoring, or induce you, then it won't be easy - you need to be able to move around (I was induced and found it very difficult lying on my back in bed being monitored). You could end up with an emergency Csection in any birth - whatever size the baby. And big babies don't always have huge heads, and small ones can be positioned more awkwardly, etc.etc. (my 9 lb 14ox DD on gas and air only wasn't too bad, possibly because she didn't actually have a huge head)

and the scans are often wrong. (a good 2 lb wrong in my case). Plus I don't think the size of your DH at birth has much bearing (could be wrong) on the size of your baby.

I could go on! It does make me cross though - this sizing thing seems to cause so much angst.

Ds (my 2nd baby) was 10lb 3oz, and I went from 7 cm dilation to giving birth in less than 10 mins, with no time for pain relief. Okay, it hurt at the time, but I'd choose it over my managed marathon with dd1 (8lb 12oz, 25 hour labour, epidural, ventouse, blah blah) any day. 2nd births are generally nothing like first ones -- load of people I know have had the full managed scenario with first baby and then popped the 2nd out in a couple of hours with never an epidural or a stitch in sight.

And no, the growth scans aren't accurate. With dd2 they consistently told me she was smaller than average. She was born at term, 9lb 10oz.

And I have one friend of no more than average height who has had four uncomplicated normal births with four dds ranging in size from 10lb 6oz up to 12lb something.

Personally, I'd take the straightforward birth of a large baby over any kind of managed birth any day, just based on how much easier it was and how much more quickly I recovered.

I think this is babyox's 1st baby isn't it? - it was her DH who was 10lbs 1 at birth...

Ah, okay, may have misread that. But would still go for normal birth over elective CS any day of the week. And why should you be dilated at 39 weeks -- 40 weeks is term, and even that is calculated on the stingy side.

oh yes frogs - normal birth anyday thanks!

I can't understand the dilated thing either - what are they on about with a first baby???!!!!

(unless I've read this wrong and it is a 2nd baby....even so)

I thought it was her first baby who was 10lb, not her DH. Completely misread it

LOL yes, I misread that too. I thought that this was 2nd baby.

friend had baby week ago today and they told her it would be 11lb odd
ended up being 9lb 1oz .

another friend had baby weds and they said it would be average 7-8lb and he was 6lb 1oz

go with the flow you might be suprised and if you need an c/s then at least you have tried . i wouldnt trust what the scan said tbh HTH

I recently saw a tv prog called 'amzing births' or somthing like that' American of course, they weren't all that, mostly unexpected home births. Anyway, remember the scene in 'monster's inc ' where the monster comes back out of the cupboard with a sock on his back and all hell lets loose, disinfecting, shaving etc. Well in this programme they had a similar attitude to home births;
Both mother and child hunky dory but are both hurried off to hospital, sirens blazing, "emergency, emergency baby born in non sterile conditions, its life is in great danger"
I reckon that American doctors would rather grow all their babies in large jars in the corner of a room and feed and water them until ready, that way they wouldn't have to deal with women giving birth at all, something of which, it seems, they are terrified.

1st babies are on average born at 41 weeks too so quite likely to go past 1 July!
Jean Sutton a specialist midwife in "optimal foetal positioning" (do a google search and you'll see lots on this) says big babies are easier to birth than small ones who tend to "wiggle" too much and get themselves in awkward positions !
Size of husband at his birth is NOT a guarantee of what YOUR baby is going to be like!

Following a number of growth scans they told me DD would be 9.5-10lbs at term - she was born at 39+4 weighing 8.5lbs - as a number of people have said growth scans are notoriously inaccurate. (DH was 11lb 10oz at birth!! )

However as the consultant pointed out to me, it's not the weight that matters, it's the size of the head & DDs was fairly average - she was a longer than average baby (DH is 6'2" & I'm 5'11" so hardly suprising ) - but that doesn't cause any problems

one of my friends is 5'2" & size 10 (don't know her weight) & she had no problems delivering a 9lb baby, so it can be done

good luck

my midwife wanted to induce me a week early as she estimated my son would be 9 pounds-ish.
he came a week early of his own accord in the end.
i had him in a birthing pool, using gas and air. he was just under 10 pounds.
generally speaking, your baby wont grow too big for your body.
a c section wasnt offered to me. just early induction.
with regards to pain etc i decided as it was my first baby i wouldnt know any different anyway, it would be normal to me.
i was scanned on monday as am due in early sept with no.2 and they say this babe is about 1.5 heavier than most at 30 weeks and again i may be offered early induction, but that scares the hell out of me. i want to go natural again.
midwife told me they would probably let him get to about 11 pounds before they got concerned!! not if it was my first though so dont panic!!!
you'll be fine. just make sure you choose what makes you feel happiest and u feel most comfortable with.

Hi there
Thankyou for all your words of wisdom! This is first baby, hubby was a 10lber thats why they think its big. I did ask my doc how accurate the growth scans were and she reckoned the doctor who did the reading at the hospital is usually spot on give or take a few ounces.
I think they are over cautious here in the states (probably scared of litigation)...and I know many women do give birth to big babies naturally and without problems. To be honest they have just paniced me so that my head is filled with all kinds of scenarios.....
I dont think an elective would be right for me, though I think if nothing happens by wednesday they will definitely want to induce! Fingers crossed something will happen before then. Am bouncing on my gym ball and drinking raspberry leaf tea in hope!

ds1 was 9lb 12oz and I had no trouble delivering him, the midwife said it's easier to deliver a bigger baby as the weight gets them moving and they are less likely to have their hands by their heads - ouch!!!! I would at least try for a vaginal delivery, the recovery should be much quicker and you'll be able to get up and about quicker.

Betsyboop... I know head is a factor and hubby has the biggest head - size wise -of anyone I know! Seriously! Thankyou all for your best wishes it is much appreciated and helps in making a decision so far from home.