My feed

to access all these features

Get updates on how your baby develops, your body changes, and what you can expect during each week of your pregnancy by signing up to the Mumsnet Pregnancy Newsletters.


Is my baby really "huge"??

17 replies

MoanaofMotunui · 15/06/2017 07:11

Just wondering if anyone has any similar experiences!!

I had a 36 week scan yesterday and, once the sonographer and trainee had finished comparing measurements, I asked on the off-chance if they could tell baby's current weight and what sort of size he might be at birth.

The sonographer checked and said baby is currently approx 7lb 9oz and then launched into a frenzy about how "huge" baby is and that I possibly have gestational diabetes and need a GTT urgently with a view to induce at 39 weeks if the results show GD.

I've been mulling over it all through the night and am quite confused how they didn't mention baby's weight or him being big before I'd asked. Is he really that "huge"? How much is he likely to put on over the next 4 (or so) weeks?

For reference DD was born at 40+ 4 weighing 7lb 11oz, but the boys in my family have always run much heavier than the girls.

OP posts:
LittleCandle · 15/06/2017 07:37

That sounds like a perfectly normal weight to me. Both my girls were over 8lbs at birth and although GD was suspected with DD2, I didn't have it. Obviously, you need to get that checked out, but to be honest, I am not sure what the issue is. That is not a 'huge' baby.

Emma2803 · 15/06/2017 07:48

I seem to remember my son being guestimated as being 7lb 4 ish at 37 weeks then 9lb 10 at 39+3 weeks, estimated as 10lb+ on delivery so induced at 40+4 and born two days later weighing a not massive for a boy 8lb 11!

I don't really trust scan weight measurement for this reason.

Intransige · 15/06/2017 07:49

Third trimester scans are about 30% accurate for estimating weight. It's basically a guess.

But you should take any risk seriously - I assume they referred you for a GTT?

arbrighton · 15/06/2017 08:28

Well I was estimated at 8lb9 yesterday on my growth scan at 37 weeks, and even with innaccuracy, they're concerned about he/she being too large so I'm being induced next week

But this is more as a result of the movement up (and above) centile lines as the growth scans have continued.

Consultant was keen to emphasise that weight was only an estimate but definitely NOT a small baby...

arbrighton · 15/06/2017 08:30

Oh, and there's been zero mention of GTT etc- didn't get one at the 'usual' point and no glucose in urine etc to cause concern on that front

Gooseygoosey12345 · 15/06/2017 10:30

Doesn't sound massive to me. Apparently my baby weighted 6lbs at my 34 week scan and no one is concerned. Sonographer just said we probably won't need tiny baby clothes Grin

MistyMeena · 15/06/2017 10:45

My midwife flapped because she reckoned mine would be over 9lbs and I'm only very small. In fact he wasn't even 8 so don't let It worry you too much!

princesseggo · 15/06/2017 11:09

I really wouldn't rely on growth scans! I was on track for a 7lbs baby when I was scanned at 37 weeks. Turns out she was 9lbs 12ozBlush

MoanaofMotunui · 15/06/2017 12:25

Thank you for all the replies, it's reassuring to know the scans aren't overly accurate for weight!

I've been booked in to see a diabetic midwife tomorrow. Apparently it's too late to do a GTT, so I'm going to have to monitor my blood sugars from now on.

I'm so confused as to whether this is actually going to show whether I have GD or not??!!

OP posts:
princesseggo · 15/06/2017 12:48

Forgot to say - I had the GTT quite early on in pregnancy and it was negative. Still had a massive baby.

RuskBaby · 15/06/2017 12:53

We were expecting an 11lb baby, she came 7lb 13oz so had to order some newborn clothes as everything was 0-3.

Julybug · 15/06/2017 15:36

My sister gave birth last week to a beautiful 7lbs7 baby girl and my sister had GD and all was fine

EdgarAllenPoe · 15/06/2017 19:02

I had a scan at 40 weeks as I'd been measuring big the whole pregnancy. They reckoned 8.5lbs, so a decent size, but I knew they were off. No talk of inducing due to size. 3 days later he was born weighing 10lbs. I knew I was right! Too big for newborn clothes at birth.

No gd or other health issues either, I just make big babies.

mammaofjoelandunbornboy · 16/06/2017 07:31

My 1st son was 9lbs, on my 2nd son now, they say hel be over 9lbs at 40 weeks had growth scan, they dont seem too bothered, im 5ft 1 - just make big babies 🙈 - but ive heard growth scans are unreliable anyway- what will be will be xx

Mummyme87 · 16/06/2017 11:13

At 36/40 DS was estimated 7lb 10oz. He was born 10lb 5oz at 41/40 so pretty accurate from scanning estimates. However they are nortoriously inaccurate at estimating larger babies weights. I would say go for a Fasting. Glucose and HBA1C to rule out GDM. Turned out I did have undiagnosed diabetes and DS was macrosomic at birth with other complications of untreated diabetes.

PurpleAlerts · 16/06/2017 11:19

I had a scan at 35 weeks where I was told my baby was estimated at 7lb 7oz. They explained that in the final 5 weeks the weight goes up by about half a lb a week so I was looking at a full term weight of over 10lb!

DD was born the day before her due date at 8lb 3oz. I have heard many similar stories from other mums. Weight estimates from scans are notoriously inaccurate.

Desperad0 · 16/06/2017 11:23

I had a scan at about the same time and was told the baby was 'off the charts' had already been tested for GDD and clear
He was 9.8 a few days over due- I wouldn''t worry and don't think they're hugely accurate.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.