For those who have had more than one pregnancy, did your fundal heights reflect baby's size?

[BanditaMamacita]

That title might have been kind of confusing, haha. I'm not really sure how to word what I'm trying to ask. I'm wondering if there is a trend in women's own fundal height measurements and the size of their babies. Obviously, from woman to woman varies dramatically and its just a general growth indicator. But for an individual woman, is there a trend? For example, My ds measured 2cm behind my dd for my whole pregnancy, and was born a full pound smaller, so it seems like my fundal height might be a decent indicator of size. I'm measuring larger than both my previous kids now, which i guess is why i'm curious... Trying to figure out how big she might be! (and if fundal height is an indication, i would guess she's already over 9 pounds... yikes! lol) Anyway, just wondering what your experiences are... Like if anyone measured bigger, but actually had a smaller baby than a previous pregnancy or something

[lunita1]

I always pretty much measured right on for my dates, and my youngest was more than a pound bigger than my oldest. That's probably not very helpful, is it?

The amount of amniotic fluid and baby's position can also play a role in fundal height measurements. I'm not sure they're a good indicator of baby's size? I think my midwife felt a fuller belly and a bigger head and predicted a good size baby with #3.

[BanditaMamacita]

Yeah, i figured fluid and position might play a role too. I'm guessing the height means nothing and is, again, just a growth indicator even for an individual woman, but i'm really curious about people's experiences. I also tend to measure small-ish and have gestationally large babies (8.11 and 7.9, both at 38 weeks, measuring 37 cm and 35 cm), so, in the interest of passing the final weeks of this pregnancy thinking about something interesting and totally useless, i thought i'd ask about other people's experiences Thanks for your info

[JamieCatheryn]

Subsequent pregnancies tend to measure ahead in fundal height compared to first time, I think. I didn't closely check with my first but I think I was right on weeks=cms, a was a couple cm's ahead with my second. 1st babe was almost 9lbs 2nd was just over 8lbs. Only thing about size in there I'd expect to learn from a varying fundal height would be if I was a month or more off on my dates or if there were two babes in there.

[mama to 2 girls]

With dd1 I measured right on...she was born at 40+3 at 8+lbs. (so average size)

With dd2 I measured AHEAD by 1-2 weeks the majority of the p/g...she was born at 39 weeks at almost 8lbs. (again average)

With ds I measured BEHIND for the majority of the p/g and sometimes right on and he was born at barely 41 weeks at 10+lbs. (NOT average )

So I don't put to much stock into fundal height measurements.

[Kidzaplenty]

I usually measure a couple of weeks larger. This time, I am right on target. Not sure if that means a "smaller" baby or not (with my smaller being a 7+ pounder).

[JamieB]

I consistently measured 2-4 cms ahead with both my pregnancies. Both my boys were very close in size, 7 14 and 7 12. I know this isn't exactly what you're asking but just saying you can be measuring quite far ahead and have an average size baby.

[bethanyclaire]

It has been true for me, so we'll see what happens with this babe. That said, I was heavier with both of my first pregnancies than I am now. My pre-pg starting weight was exactly the same with DS and DD, though I gained more with DS. This time I started about 30 pounds less than those pg'cies.

DS1 - I measured about a week or so ahead. He was born at 41+ weeks and weighed 8lb 10oz.

DD - I consistently measured at least 3 weeks ahead for the entire pg'cy, sometimes more. She was born at 40+1 and weighed 9lb 9oz.

This pregnancy I've measured exactly on for the most part. I'm expecting him to be closer to DS's size but we'll see.

[Sudonk]

My fundal height was a good indicator of baby's position. When babies were well-positioned, they measured right on. When they weren't well-postioned, the height varied widely (even shrinking from one visit to the next).

I am a birthing assembly line, having 7.5 lb babies at 39 week 4 days (all three!) so I can't give an indication of how fundal height varies with size differences. I've never experienced a difference!

[BetsyS]

Mine did. With my first, I measured about 6 weeks ahead (I'm fat, so that's not as crazy as it sounds). With my second, I measured about 1-2 weeks ahead.

My second was TWO pounds smaller than my first (thankfully! I was happy).

[mamabadger]

I always measured slightly big for dates, and in pregnancies #1 and #2 was sent for US to rule out twins. I was closest to "normal" size for my nearly 10-pounder, and measured bigger for my 7 lb 3 oz DD and 8 lb DS. I think I just carry a lot of fluid.

[thefreckledmama]

Which each pregnancy I have measured bigger than the one before at the same point. My girls were, respectively 6-3, 6-14, 6-12. I think with my youngest, I was generally measuring a few cms ahead from about 20 weeks on.