How accurate is customised fundal chart with regards to estimated baby weight?

[mrsnlw]

Currently I am measuring on target (each week is a cm and Im usually spot on) and according to my chart my baby is currently 6.2lbs! And if carrying on in the same growth manner, the baby will be 9.2lbs!

What is your experience of the accuracy of the cutsomised growth charts?

How do you find out what your baby is estimated to weigh?
I'm 36 weeks and nobody has mentioned an estimated weight. I've measured bang on fundal height thingy but no idea what sort of size baby to expect.
Sorry I don't have an answer to your question!

Really not very, I was on the line for nine with DS1 and he was just over 7.

I can't remember paying any attention to it with DS2 because I could tell myself he was going to be enormous without the help of a chart

Hobby2014 I had a graph in notes which had fundal height on one axis and then centile lines marking out an estimated birth weight, taking into account mothers weight, height and scan measurements I think, if it's not your first they will also include previous baby details possibly.

Hobby Yes, doodle is correct. The char has fundal height, and pregnancy weeks on and the weight is on the right side of the chart in grams.

doodle I did think to myself last night, how can they tell what size when there's fluid and all sorts of other stuff in there lol

I got sent for extra scans because a midwife measured me as 33cm at 38 weeks.Sonographer said I just had good stomach muscles . DD was born a very average 6lb 11.

I think there's a lot of variation in bump size in reality. Fundus measurements are just an estimate.

My MW made up my fundal measurements

Means naff all IME. I have measured bang on dates all through all three pregnancies. The weights of my babies have varied between 8 lb and just over 9lb. And since they were all bigger than average, you would think measuring bang on would mean an average size baby.

I asked my midwife this and she told me to I gore the estimated weight that it gives as it is not accurate at all.

*ignore

Completely agree the measurements are not accurate. I had gestational diabetes and was told both of mine were going to be at least 10lbs, following numerous scans throughout later stages, let alone just the standard measurements. The boys were born at 7lb 4 and 7lb 12!

my midwife told me the graph was a waste of time too!

I measured 'big' and over the line every time until 37ish weeks. then they measured and bump hadn't grown - queue loads of panic and growth scans which were all fine. then he went back to measuring on the line.

baby was born at 6lb 11 so quite small in the end!

absolutely spot on! predicted 10 lb 7 and, oh yes indeedy, he was!

I think depends on what chart. I was measuring on lower end of normal with my first and my dd was 7lb4. for the second pregnancy they made me a costume chart based on my first baby's weight and I was measuring off the chart on that ds came 2 pounds bigger than dd.
but either way i don't think they are so accurate and should be used as a general guideline

I was measuring big for ages dd was born at 37+5 and a few days before I was measuring 41 weeks she was 7lb 3 so them measurements were way off.

I was tiny and measured tiny, people didn't even realise I was pregnant.
DD was a rather impressive 8lb 14. I had to ask then to repeat the weight 3x, as did relatives and friends, when I told them what she weighed.
So I don't have a lot of faith in measurements!