Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Pregnancy

Talk about every stage of pregnancy, from early symptoms to preparing for birth.

Flip

Original poster

Measuring 32 at 36 weeks pregnant- advice please!

23 replies

gd1976 · 14/02/2012 19:33

I know I can look up this myself but as I have a demanding toddler being sick today I thought this may be a quicker route.
I have measured a week or so small in this, my second pregnancy. However today I'm 36 weeks pregnant and was only measuring 32 weeks. I've been ordered a scan this evening which will hopefully happen in next 2-3 days. I have had some reduced movement, but I think that's more to do with the stage I'm at, as I remember movement slowing down in my first pregnancy.
Please could you advise me on realistic reasons for this measurement drop. My first pregnancy I measured slightly larger the whole way through so I'm unrehearsed on this issue!

OP posts:

Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

fuckityfuckfuckfuck · 14/02/2012 19:40

Is it possible the baby's shifted position? My baby has gone transverse and as a result the fundal measurement has gone right down. Referring you for a scan in this instance is exactly the right thing to do, as if anything is detected it can be dealt with. I'm 35 weeks, am having another check next week to establish if baby is still wonky, and after that I'll be booked for a scan and an ECV if necessary. My midwife seemed very positive that nothing was wrong. I also don't have a great deal of fluid, which makes my bump look quite small.

Original poster

gd1976 · 14/02/2012 19:50

Thank you, that is reassuring. I'm just glad that I'm getting a scan, even just for peace of mind......

OP posts:

IHeartIona · 14/02/2012 19:53

I also measured 32 at 37 weeks, and growth scan estimated size of baby to be 6 lb 11, I had her last Thursday at 40+6 and she was 7 lb 5. Think it was mainly to do with position in my case, and also because she was engaged at 37 weeks, so that also reduced the size of my bump.

HamblesHandbag · 14/02/2012 20:20

I don't know how true this is - maybe others know? - but I remember a woman on the ante-natal ward with me had late scans and was told baby was small, but then baby was fine when born.

I remember some discussion about how it's difficult to be accurate with later measurements, even with a scan.

Finallyfinally · 14/02/2012 20:22

How tall are you? Tall women come up small for dates?

Original poster

gd1976 · 14/02/2012 20:30

I'm 5ft 5 so not tall...... I measured fine in first pregnancy so that's why I'm slightly more concerned this time.....

OP posts:

lucyfluff · 14/02/2012 20:41

I had my 34 week check today as was really worried bubba was small but MW measured and spot on, anyway she pointed out that slimmer girls with strong tummy muscles often 'hide' baby better resulting in a smaller bump.

I'm sure your little one is absolutly fine but the scan will just reassure you. Good luck x

bcmummy · 14/02/2012 20:59

This is exactly what happened to me last week. I had been measuring bang on all the way through and then at my midwife appt last week at 37+3 I measured 34 so I was sent for a scan. I was a bit anxious for the couple of days I had to wait for the scan and was also surprised to be honest as I certainly didn't FEEL small! Anyway - I was glad to be sent for the scan as it's better to be safe than sorry after all.

At the scan they didn't estimate the baby's weight but did measure the baby's abdominal circumference and length of femur. Apparently they would also usually measure the head circumference but it was engaged and too low down for them to be able to get a measurement. The midwife said that the fact that the head was engaged could be part of the reason why I measured a bit small. However, baby's abdominal and femur measurements DID show up a little below average (about 40-45th percentile when plotted on the growth charts) but still well within normal range so nothing to worry about. They also checked the level of the amniotic fluid and checked the placenta and the blood flow through the cord (which was what I was concerned about) and everything showed up normal. So I think baby is just a touch smaller than his/her big brother was! Like you, this is my second pregnancy & with my DS I always measured fine and when he was born (at 40+0) he was 8lb9oz and was always near the top of the growth charts etc. I was expecting a bigger baby this time as apparently that is the norm 2nd time round, but it doesn't look like it will be...but who knows! I haven't had any reasons given to me as to why baby might be slightly smaller than average/smaller than my DS...it just is I guess. I am reassured by the scan anyway that all is well. Good luck with everything - it will all be absolutely fine I'm sure!

babybouncer · 14/02/2012 21:04

The reason they do the dating scan at 12 weeks is because after that date foetuses growth varies hugely. My DS1 measured absolutely average on both scans, but I'm now pregnant again (32 weeks) and have had to have lots of extra scans due to some small measurements. These have all 'righted' themselves now, so I think they like to keep an eye on these things as a check rather than because they are usually a problem.

Karoleann · 14/02/2012 21:33

I measured small in with both DC2 and DC3, at 38 weeks, I barely measured 32 weeks with both. Both were born (induced at 41 weeks) and weighed 8lb. OB/GYN just said I had strong stomach muscles!

Original poster

gd1976 · 14/02/2012 21:49

Thanks everyone, and bcmummy that's all helpful info so thanks. Hopefully scan won't take too long now.

OP posts:

startail · 14/02/2012 21:58

DD1 MW sent me for a scan because I was small for dates.
They decided I had low fluid and did lots of monitoring.
DD1 was born naturally at 39 weeks 6 lb 2 oz.
Second time around, much more laid back MWs didn't fuss. I don't think I was much bigger and DD2 was born at home with no fuss at all. 39+4 and 6 lb 6.
I just don't seem to grow big bumps or big babies despite huge hips

Good luck.

startail · 14/02/2012 22:01

DD1 is 14 and almost 2inches taller than me and a very curvy adult size 12.
It's impossible to believe she fitted neatly into baby-grows one size smaller than standard new born ones.

bcmummy · 16/02/2012 20:05

Just wanted to let you know gd1976 that I went into labour a few hours after I wrote my last post and my DD was born at 5.52am on Feb 15th weighing 7lb12oz - she was 9 days early at that weight so despite measurements and the scan she was most definitely not small for dates in the end! Although funnily enough the first thing the midwife said when she saw me when I arrived at the hospital was to ask if I had been measuring small! I guess I just looked small...Just goes to show, none of it is an exact science. Hope you've had your scan now and all is well x

Yummymummyyobe1 · 16/02/2012 20:54

Hi gd1976 I am in the same boat I am measuring big at 29wks and 5 days, I have to be re measured next week and if I am still measuring big then I will need to go for another growth scan.

It is funny that I was measuring okay two weeks ago.

HamblesHandbag · 17/02/2012 09:31

Congratyulations bcmummy!

And good to know the worry was for nothing IYSWIM.

Does she have a name?

hope you are all well.

bcmummy · 17/02/2012 12:42

Thank you Hambles! Her name is Lauren and she is a complete star - I'm on cloud nine!

Dozeyland · 17/02/2012 13:06

I measured exactly this at 36 weeks.....DD came out 8lb 9!

threecurrantbuns · 17/02/2012 20:43

Ive measured at least three less than my weeks with my 3.

They were born at 5lb9, 7lb4 & 6lb15.

So think measuring is more to be on the safe side but doesnt always mean alot.

Preg with no4 and only been measured once so far at 28wk measured 27, hope this doesnt mean im in for a big baby this time.

PavlovtheCat · 17/02/2012 20:49

Measured 3+ less with both mine from early on. With dd it became 4 less at 36 wks she stopped growing so it seemed, so booked in for induction at 38wks. Went into spontaeneous labour at 37+5, dd arrived at 5lbs. Perfectly formed and absolutely not a jot wrong with her, she was jus little, she is now 5.5 and and on the slight side of normal for height and weight, developing great guns. No known reason was given for her being growth restricted in utero.

Ds measured small, around 3 less. Born 7.7lb 10 days late, aged 2 now and again fab and developing well, a little dot of a boy, but no concerns at all.

Midwife just said I carried small

Original poster

gd1976 · 17/02/2012 22:00

Congratulations bcmummy!!! What fantastic news, you must be thrilled!!
Hope you're feeling ok and managing to get a little bit of kip......
I've been absent from mums net for a few days as was sent into hospital by my midwife after being measured and then reduced movement. I was put on the trace machine and the heart rate dipped, so there was quite a panic as doctors raced round and they planned to deliver ASAP! However, the heart rate soon turned back to normal and I'm now being closely monitored as an out patient, and have had steroids to boost the babies lungs if I do have to deliver early. I'm still only 36 weeks so hopefully it will wait a while yet. They gave me a growth scan as well, and despite measuring 32 weeks, the measurements came out at 35 weeks, so as you say, it's not an exact science.
Thank you all for your posts,

OP posts:

startail · 17/02/2012 22:23

Congratulations to bcmummy and welcome lauran.

Gd1969 I hope the baby waits a while yet and good luck. Sending gentle growing nicely vibes their way.

jennalouise · 31/03/2015 18:30

I'm 37 weeks pregnant, I had a measurement of my bump done two weeks ago, it was 32 and baby was on her side. I had one today and its 31 and shes got her bum to my tummy. the midwifes sending me for a scan tomorrow, do I have anything to worry about?:(

Flip

Swipe left for the next trending thread