Measuring small :(

[Superslinger]

I'm 36 weeks, measured this morning by GP as 34. I'm trying not to google. Is this very small? Could it mean baby's in trouble? Unfortunately I've had a rubbish midwife til now who's never measured me before so impossible to tell whether baby's always been small or whether she's stopped growing. :( GP asked me to go back in a week and if still 34 will send for a scan. Surely this is a long time if something's wrong?! So worried! :(

When I was pg with my DD 2.5yrs ago, I was told they have a general rule of 1cm per wk +/- 2cm. Now I might be wrong or it have changed, but you fall within the ok range. I always measured 2cm smaller than my dates, despite putting on a fair bit of weight, & although DD was only 6lb 5oz at full term, she wasn't abnormally small (plus I was only 6lb6 at birth & still quite petite so wasn't expecting a giant baby :) ).

It could be that you have a tilted uterus I think, that means you measure small (someone will be along soon I'm sure who has experience of this), or the way baby is laying, or you're just small or that baby's growth is slowing down BUT without regular measurements, it would be hard to know which one, hence the week's wait-&-see approach.

Good luck, it'll probably be fine :)

I'm measuring small, however my baby is measuring exactly what she should be. Midwife measurements are subjective and not at all accurate.
Don't be worried, I'm 3-4 weeks behind and had my scan and what-fun, baby is FINE. Being small is a blessing, enjoy it :)

not small at all, do you have a long body? i'm not very tall - 5'5ish but have a long body and for my whole pregnancy was small for dates - at the end i was measuring 32 at 40 weeks (he was born on due date). he was only 6lb8, but completely normal. i was sent for many panic scans though, even one the day before i was born and told he would only be a max of 5lb. i reckon it's all to do with body length, long bodies hold them in, short bodies they pop out as there's nowhere to go.

^ Agreed, I'm tall (5'7) and that's what my midwife said to me :)

I'm measuring 3 weeks small and well below where they expect baby's weight to be given the sizes of my previous babies.

The midwife thinks it's due to the position the baby's in (transverse and back to back) and I'm inclined to agree.

If I'm still significantly behind next week (31+5) when she measures she says she'll sort a growth scan.

Measuring a bump is quite unreliable, as it can depend a lot on baby's position and the person measuring :) Plus towards the end of pg your bump gets smaller as baby engages, so you can measure smaller at the end than you did previously.

FWIW, I measured small through pg and DD was born perfectly healthy but on the smaller side.

Oh, and I'm short, so nothing to do with the tall person=small bump theory ;) Another friend of mine who is the same height and was due the same time had a bump quite a lot bigger than mine. Lo and behold, her baby was quite a lot bigger too!

My best friend was induced early because her baby was measuring 'too big' through the incredibly scientific method of a tape measure.

Her baby turned out to be 5lbs.

DD was measuring 'small' and turned out to be almost 8lbs. I'm maybe an inch taller than my friend but not much.

So it really isn't that accurate...

At 36 weeks my bump measured 31 weeks, I had loads of growth scans, was told DD2 was going to be around 4lb and she was 6lb3oz. Who wants a big old bump anyway, be thankful growth scans can be 1lb out or more if you go by my measurements

There is so much room for error with bump measurements and even growth scans. DO NOT GOOGLE and try not to worry about it

If you are tall that is normal. To measure to matching is on the big side. We have customised growth charts here, and 1cm=1 week does not match up!

Ok, thanks, I'll try to calm down. I'm not tall or with a long body, but I'm not small either (5'5) and hubby's enormous, so don't think we'd expect to have a particularly small baby either. Not engaged either - says 'free' on notes in bit about how many fifths engaged. I don't know, I suppose I'll just have to sit tight, I just feel like I'm not doing very well at all with being pregnant -I've got SPD so baby's got constant pain hormones flying at it, and now I don't seem to be feeding her properly either. :(

Please, please don't worry. Many people measure small and more often than not there is absolutely nothing wrong. I heard not long ago that measuring bumps was being stopped due to lack of accuracy when predicting the baby's size.

At 33wks I measured 27cm - although I'd always measured on the small side I had never been this much 'under' so I was sent for a growth scan. On the day we saw a perfect baby of normal size folded up very neatly - in fact she has longer legs than average!!!! It must vary so much how babies are carried and so how big bumps are. Position of baby, degree of engagement, size of mum must all play a role.

Xxxxx

I measured 34 weeks at 36 too, had a scan and was just told that the baby was hiding.

I got lots of comments about how small my bump is - I felt ginormous!

OP you are feeding her properly. All these comments about the unreliability of bump measurements are absolutely right. 2cm is considered just about within the normal range - I measured 2cm small throughout the 3rd trimester and MW never sent me for a growth scan. I then gave birth to a 9lb+ baby at 40 wks. Just shows how inaccurate they can be!

Oh please don't worry unduly, that's one thing I hate hate hate about these measurements - they cause women to feel bad which is the LAST thing you need right now!
I would ask for a growth scan to put your mind at rest. When we saw our girl on the screen she was as squished as squished could be - but perfectly the right size :D

I measured at 36 weeks at only 31 weeks I has a 8lb 12oz baby.
I am tall and a bit overwieght.
the measurements are not at all accurate

I think most people I know have measured a bit small or big at some point because it's just so inaccurate measuring from the outside. If they were worried you'd be sent straight for a scan so try not to worry.

I measured small at one point and was sent for a scan the following morning - all normal on the scan, of course!

Agree with everyone else, it's a very inaccurate way of measuring. At 36 weeks I was measuring small but DS2 was 9lb 1oz at birth so pretty bloody huge!

I'm short (5'2") and always measured small - usually 2-3cm less than expected. Dd1 was 8lb7oz and dd2 was 7lb9oz.

I really don't think you need to worry.

With DS I was measuring 36 weeks at 42 weeks, when labour was induced. DS was 8lb 6.5ozs.

Surprise surprise, I am 39 weeks pregnant, and measuring about 4 weeks small. Everyone keeps commenting on my 'nice, small baby', but I'm guessing she will be nearer 9lb.

It's all a load of rubbish, and should be used as a guide only. Not the 'science' it is made out to be.

I was measuring about two weeks behind dates at 40 weeks but DS was born at 40+4 measuring a whopping 8lb10oz and was a very healthy, hungry baby but I didn't have a huge amount of amniotic fluid whereas I had friends with gigantic bumps who gave birth to tiny babies who had been surrounded by tons of water.

I went through my birth notes with an obstetrician who said that fundus measurements were extremely unreliable.

Best of luck and try not to worry. x