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

possibly stupid question but if i have a very big bump does that mean i have a very big baby inside?

31 replies

Mimsy2000 · 28/09/2008 21:36

my bump is pretty darn big. i've gained a ton of weight during this pregnancy and my bump is huge - disproportionally so according to my hubby. he says i look like a toffee apple on two sticks . i have gestational diabetes but have it under control with diet.

having said that my first ds was 7lb when born. i'm wondering does my bump size mean i've got a whopper in me? or is it just bad luck or something else? i've got a growth scan booked for next week but have heard they are not necessarily reliable.

any ideas?

OP posts:

Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

nancy75 · 28/09/2008 21:38

my friend looked like she had eaten an elephant and had a 6lb10oz baby. she honestly looked like she could have been having quite a few babies, aparently it was mainly water?!

HereComeTheGirls · 28/09/2008 21:41

me too-had enormous bump and dd was 6lb 2oz!

EffiePerine · 28/09/2008 21:42

KristinaM · 28/09/2008 21:42

its not a stupid question and teh answer is not necesarily. there is more than a baby in there

BabyBaby123 · 28/09/2008 21:43

i don;t think it follows, my first was 8 1/2 lbs, 2nd was 7lbs, i'm already massive at 10 weeks this time but had an early scan and baby measuring small
my gp said you do tend to be bigger with subsequent pregnancies due to muscle tone

phdlife · 28/09/2008 21:44

people were asking me when I was due from about 31 weeks, and by 37 weeks every midwife that saw me was wincing and sucking in her breath . eventually I was packed off to see the consultant midwife who gave me a thorough feel and said she wasn't sure, but she suspected there was a lot of water in there... oh my golly goodness was she right! I had floods when my waters broke and 10hrs later every contraction was still pumping it out - and ds was just 8lbs 11 1/2oz. ("just" - - well in my family that's a pretty ordinary sized baby!)

piratecat · 28/09/2008 21:45

i was told to expect a whopper, by (stupid scared me silly) midwife.

based on my weeble like stature.

dd was just over 6lbs. most of bump was water.

NotBigNotClever · 28/09/2008 21:47

I had an enormous bump with my second and it turned out that the baby was a fair size (8lbs 7oz) but the placenta was abnormally huge (v.v.bleargh - according to dh).

VeronicaMars · 28/09/2008 21:52

I had a very big bump but dd was only 7.2

bateeha24 · 28/09/2008 22:22

well on my 1st pg i was huge and my ds was only 6lbs 13oz with 2nd pg i got huge only in the last weeks but dd was 7lbs 14oz and now im 36+4 pg and i have a bump of a 20 week pg woman so as you see all pregnancies are different so many of the times its mainly waters . dont worry about as long it comes healthy thats what it matters .

Original poster

Mimsy2000 · 29/09/2008 10:42

thanks for the posts. i've got a few health issues and in talking to my consultant last week get the feeling they are edging me towards a c-section, which i'm not really feeling too good about.

OP posts:

Wisknit · 29/09/2008 10:52

I don't thinll size of bump is overly reliable. I was the opposite, small, neat bumps, MWs (both times)said ooh prob only 7lbs or less and both mine were 8lb 7oz. Not enormous but not 'small'.
So really they can't tell.
I wasn't surprised, as I pointed out to 1st MW, no one in my family has had a baby under 8 lb in living memory.

Don't let them bully you into a section if you aren't comfortable with that.

buttercreamfrosting · 29/09/2008 11:09

I was enormous all three times and all three times the midwives said the babies would be MAHOOSIVE. I had 2 just over 7lbs and one just under. And lots and lots of water....

Haylstones · 29/09/2008 11:12

I had a small bump first time and dd was 7lb2. Second time I was massive and ds was 9lb 8 so in my case a big bump meant a big baby

Original poster

Mimsy2000 · 29/09/2008 11:21

i am intrigued about the amount of water i may be carrying about!?!?! my waters were broken for me last time so i've never really understood the whole thing....

OP posts:

Niecie · 29/09/2008 11:31

I had the opposite - small bump and big DS2 - 9lb. And that was after being told that I had only a 7lber in there.

Bump no different from DS1 and he was 6lb 10oz.

So, imo, bump size has no bearing.

I have a friend who was massive and carried a lot of water and had an average sized DS so could be you have a lot of water too.

Oblomov · 29/09/2008 11:50

I have actually been told this, this time. I have alot of amniotic fluid. baby inside is not that big. Last time they told me he was over 10lb. Turned out to be 6lb 13 oz.
yeah right !!!!

Oblomov · 29/09/2008 11:53

My waters didn't break last time. This time they are up in the 95th+++ centile. No cause for concern. She did warn me, that if they break, man they will WHOOSH big time. My sil and I joked that if I get any feelings at all, I am to go immed and sit in dh's precious Mercedes, just for the hell of it.

WheresTheAuPair · 29/09/2008 13:08

on the other side of the scale- I had massive bump (I mean freakish!) with DS. Had loads of water and 10lb baby! Got massive bump again and predicted another whopper

rainbowdays · 29/09/2008 14:01

With me - first time average size bump with average size baby at 7lbs 12oz, second time was HUGE midwives kept asking if I was sure it was not twins!!!!! measured large for dates all along, but baby was only 7lbs3oz so lighter than previous baby but loads of water. Most recent pregnancy, average size bump, when waters went I thought it was so little it must only be hind waters or something, but nope the rest of the bump was baby at a great 9lbs!!!! Yet I had a smaller bump than with the 7lbs3oz baby.

So in summary - you just can't tell from bump size!!!!!

Also when I was in hospital with 2nd baby, one woman on the ward was told that looking at the bump and the scan that her first baby would most likely be small, and according to the midwives the baby felt small too..... then the poor lady gave birth naturally to a whooping 11lb4oz baby ( ouch!) So the reverse of small bump big baby can definitely be true!

PoppyMorgan · 29/09/2008 14:43

I just weighed and have put on stone and half already and I'm only 25 weeks, is this normal??? I am normally 8.5 stones and am. 5ft 4ins.

pagwatch · 29/09/2008 14:45

oh god i had midwife eyeing me for weeks and muttering dark warnings about HUGE baby.
He was 7lbs 6 ozs.
When my waters broke it was like the opening scene from Hawaii 5-o though.

PoppyMorgan · 29/09/2008 14:48

Have I done the right thing, please help!! I had a nuchal scan because of my age of being nearly 40 - had a good result with 1:1500!

I know this sounds silly but my two previous pregnancies have had amnio's cos my AFP bloods have always come back high risk 1:100, so this time I didn't bother with amnio because of my good odds, but I still can't stop worrying whether I've done the right thing, and should I have opted for an amnio anyway!

Has anyone else been the same sort of thing, any advice would be welcome....

PoppyMorgan · 29/09/2008 14:49

lol!! Thanks, I've previously had two big boys weighing 8lbs 8 and after being induced 2 weeks early, so this one will most probably be the same....... arggggggggghhhh

tablefor3 · 29/09/2008 16:01

The unhelpful flip side that I have a small bump (as in got sent for another scan because "small for dates"), but the as-yet-unborn baby is plenty big enough according to the scan - legs are at 95% percentile of length!

So, no, i think there is little correlation.

Flip

1 2

Swipe left for the next trending thread