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

1 2

Original poster

Measuring baby bump is bollocks isn't it?

43 replies

silkybear · 10/07/2017 10:52

Just been to the midwife for 28 week appointment and surprise surprise my baby is 'off the charts' massive. My last baby they predicted she would be 11-13lb but was 7lb10 and on the 7th centile. Me and DH both short, no big babies in my family. Surely measuring a baby bump when you are overweight already and there is fluid, placenta and position of the baby to consider, there is no way in hell these tests can be accurate?

OP posts:

Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

Leeloo2 · 10/07/2017 10:59

I think it's a rough guide and they can send you for scans if you're very big/small, but it does seem like bollocks to me too.

ExpatMrs · 10/07/2017 11:03

I think so, they told me DD was definitely going to be 8lbs plus at 37 weeks and she was born full term at 6lbs 6oz.

Original poster

silkybear · 10/07/2017 11:13

Would love to know if anyone had actually measured big and it was actually accurate, seems so unscientific!

OP posts:

ShimmeringIce · 10/07/2017 11:28

Yes, my midwife was concerned that I was too small at 38+3, DD was born later that day weighing 9lb7oz!

lornathewizzard · 10/07/2017 11:34

Well I was measuring big for DS, chart indicates he'd be 10+ lbs and he came out 9lb 5 so not far off....
But I agree and I think generally Midwifes recognise that it's just an indicator

mortificado · 10/07/2017 11:42

Mines always been wrong too.
Told I was having a very small baby and she was 8lb1 then told I was having another huge baby, and due to the traumatic birth the first time agreed to be induced (other health conditions with me so sort of needed to be) but he was only 6lb7!

arbrighton · 10/07/2017 12:53

My bump measured big. So did the growth scans i was hnaving anyway. He was exactly the estimated weight from said scan

hrfvenia · 10/07/2017 12:59

My midwife readjusted the tape measure when she thought the measurement was wrong.

She hadn't measured anything differently than previous times. It's all rubbish. One midwife even said 'ooh I can't feel or hear baby, have you got an anterior placenta?'

To which I helpfully replied with a spluttering 'NO WHAT DO YOU MEAN?'

My experience of midwives isn't great.

Writerwannabe83 · 10/07/2017 13:20

With DS1 my bump measurements were always at the top end so was predicted a big baby. He was only 8lb 8oz though so not that big.

I'm pregnant now and when I had my 32 week Midwife appointment a few weeks ago she sent me in to hospital for a growth scan as her bump measurement had dropped down the centiles. I thought she was taking the mickey as I look massive. But I went for my scan and the baby's measurements were all over the 90th percentile so yeah......I don't have much faith in the fundal measurements but I suppose it's all they have to go off.

buddy79 · 10/07/2017 13:36

I think it can only be a very rough indication, as volumes of fluid / placenta / blood etc will all really vary. I am small myself (5'1) and had a neat, compact bump - the most the midwife said was my bump was 'interesting' - he was 9lb 1! Xx

CarrotFingers · 10/07/2017 13:44

I measured big and had a 9lb 2oz DS. I was absolutely enormous. But both my midwife, and a consultant who measured my bump at 36 weeks, said it wasn't an exact science.

DD measured more modestly and was 8lb.

Lj8893 · 10/07/2017 13:45

It is only meant to be a rough indication, it's a screening tool really so anyone measuring big or small can be referred to an appropriate care pathway.

I'm a student midwife and quite often the babies birth weight is almost spot on to the predicted weight going by the growth chart. But of course there are women who come in who have been under consultant care for large or small babies who turn out to have quite normal sized babies.

BoredOnMatLeave · 10/07/2017 13:49

I measured big, I think it was that she would be 11lb at 40 weeks and she was born 39+1 10lb 6 so pretty spot on. Same with growth scans, they were 2 lb

GraceGrape · 10/07/2017 13:52

I measured small all through. DD was 9lb8oz. I think position of uterus and amount of fluid can skew the results.

PastysPrincess · 10/07/2017 13:56

I measured slightly over but within tolerances but was still told I was having a 7lb baby as I was carrying a lot of water. He was 11lb 9oz at birth.

beccii161016 · 10/07/2017 14:09

Yep. Told me baby was 90th centile. He was born 6lb 4 just under the 10th, I had excess water. They had to report a failing of the midwife. Utter shit!

WhatWouldDarylDixonDo · 10/07/2017 14:33

I had the opposite. I was told that DC2 wasn't growing fast enough, would be small baby and ended up being induced full term but early (before 40 weeks but not prem) with a predicted weight of 5 - 5 1/2 lbs. DC2 came out at 6lb 11oz, so a perfectly average size for gestation.

EveMoneypenny · 10/07/2017 14:58

I was sent for a growth scan at 33 weeks last time because my bump measured too small. Ha ha - he was 11lbs 9oz when born at 42 weeks. Snap @PastysPrincess!

NinaMarieP · 10/07/2017 15:26

Haven't had my baby yet but I've been measured twice in the same week and had totally different measurements - the second being a couple of CM less! So it's not only a very rough guide, it also seems to depend on the person measuring and their interpretation of the fundal base and height.

Lj8893 · 10/07/2017 15:30

Yeah it will definitely depend on the person measuring (another good point to have continuity of care) and it will also depend on the position of the woman and where they are. For instance if a woman is always seen in a clinic setting on a clinic couch and then seen at home and measured whilst lying on the sofa then it's going to make a difference in the measurement!

Gothbaby · 10/07/2017 15:38

I had the opposite I had that appointment and was measured way below average so had to go in for growth scan. It was nice to see the baby again but the scan showed everything was fine and it was normal.
However since then , each midwife bump measurement has been someone different but bump size being the small side of average. So I think it's more dependent on the actual midwife themselves!! Xxx

DuggeeHugs · 10/07/2017 15:49

DC1 measured 90th percentile for bump and growth scans throughout. Estimated weight was 9lb, actual weight was 8lb 15oz, so pretty accurate.

This time bump was measuring 90th but initial growth scan said 10th. Two growth scans and bump measures later we're at 50th percentile for bump and 70th for growth scan. We'll find out this week if any of these measures come close!

Overall I think it's very variable between HCPs.

Dawsonforehead · 10/07/2017 15:50

No it's not bollocks if the person measuring is doing it properly, I am trained in this. There are ways to measure where only uterus is being measured, which will exclude any fat on the mother. In my experience this has given me far more accurate measurements for my patient ts than just placing a measuring tape down.

welshweasel · 10/07/2017 15:52

My bump always measured completely normal but a routine growth scan showed my baby was small and I had very little fluid round him. Thankfully that led to increased monitoring and an early but safe arrival. If they'd gone on bump measurement it wouldn't have been picked up.

tinypop4 · 10/07/2017 16:12

I don't think it's super accurate. I measured tiny with dd to the point that they were worries and insisted she would be 4-5lb. She popped out at 40+1 and 8lb7! I guess she curled up small

Flip

1 2

Swipe left for the next trending thread