Are girls more active in utero?

[jennica]

This baby is much more active than Ds was. It seems to be awake more than asleep lately and is moving all the time. I posted this info to my facebook status and a few people said their girls were more active in utero than their boys. I know these are just wives tales, or anecdotal evidence, but it's fun to speculate This baby also had a higher heart rate than Ds, which is another of those anecdotal things that say it will be a girl. Just wondering if your girls were more active than boys in utero? We are waiting to find out at the birth, and I'm fine with a boy or a girl, just thought it was an interesting observation.

[~Demeter~]

I actually felt my girl much less than my boys, but I had an anterior placenta with her.

[MaerynPearl]

Active babies are more active in utero. Laid back babies are more laid back. Pretty sure that's the only connection there is.

[Hannah32]

Originally Posted by MaerynPearl

Active babies are more active in utero. Laid back babies are more laid back. Pretty sure that's the only connection there is.

Is this really true? I certainly hope it is. My little guy isn't giving me any cause for worry, he bops around on a regular basis. But he seems pretty laid back. I don't get that much intense kicking and it seems like I get rather a lot of little twitches. Hubby swears he's got the "jimmy leg," which is something about me that drives him nuts! LOL.

[MaerynPearl]

My first two were both very laid back. I felt movements, sometimes constant, but never anything wild. Both of my kids have awesome temperaments, DS as a baby (after learning to sit up) actually enjoyed reclining back and relaxing more than sitting up lol.

This one is very active and I think will be taking after their daddy (whom was a gymnast, diver, wrestler and football player in school to burn off a bit of his energy... and is now a Marine and can keep going even after a long session of PT.)

[aslyn]

Well my dd was active but the kicks didnt hurt as much as with the boys LOL. This lil peanut (also a girl) is a squirmer..so far no real kicks that have me bent over!

As for the heart-rate Both my boys were in the 120-140 range, the girls were 150+

The chineese predictor thing was also accurate with all 4 of mine, as well as the ring test..but I wouldnt base my life on any of the old wives tales LOL

[BetsyS]

My first baby was soooooo laid back in utero. I might get 10 movements in a DAY, if I was lucky. We like to joke that he saved up all his energy for the outside world.

My second one was more active, but still not crazy kicks or anything. My dh felt him from the outside maybe once? He's probably average these days.

This one? Crazy active!! And has been since 17 weeks. I'm eager to see who is in there, and what he/she is like.

[moonmama22]

My ds was constantly moving in utero - and was a very active newborn. All those people who told me newborns sleep for 18 hours a day were on my list for a while!!! He never slept more than 30 minute naps and woke every 2 hours at night. Even now he is a very restless sleeper and ends up in my bed more often than not.

Now, at 27 weeks with a girl, I am hoping her demeanor reflects her acitvity in utero. She moves enough to not have me worried, but is fairly gentle and seems to sleep for long periods of time! Keeping my fingers crossed for that laid back little girl!!!

[jennica]

Originally Posted by MaerynPearl

Active babies are more active in utero. Laid back babies are more laid back. Pretty sure that's the only connection there is.

Ds was not that active in utero, but he was far from laid back once he was born. He was awake and alert a lot, was colicky for the first three months, and after that started fighting sleep. So, he certainly was the not the laid back mellow kid that I thought he would be.

[etsdtm99]

my kids are not going to help figure this out..lol my DD was calm, but i had an anterior placenta - and she is NOT a laid back/calm kid.. my DS was crazy in utero and he is super laid back .. (even as a almost 2 yr old)

[MammaB21]

Originally Posted by MaerynPearl

Active babies are more active in utero. Laid back babies are more laid back. Pretty sure that's the only connection there is.

Not true in my case. DD was super active in the womb. Constantly kicking and rolling around, sometimes to the point that it hurt. She moved all day every day and the movements were easily visible from the outside. Most days it looked like she was trying to claw her way out of there. When she was born, she was really laid back, even lazy. She was always a little behind physically and didn't bother to do things like sit up, or roll over. She wasn't demanding and was almost always content with just about any situation.

As for the boy versus girl thing, this one is most definitely a boy and he's starting out pretty active as well. Although, he is a little less active than DD was (or so I think). He only has 2 active times a day. Some days I worry because I haven't felt him at all yet. But when he is active he's bouncing around, and easily felt/seen from the outside at 22 weeks. I wouldn't classify this baby as being 'calm' in utero.

DD's heart rate was 167. This one's is 141. The string test was accurate for both, as was the chinese predictor chart.

[~Charlie's~Angel~]

Only read the thread title and.....

FOR THE LOVE OF GOD I HOPE NOT!!!!

If its true, I am never getting pregnant again, as my boys probably brusied my insides and tried coming out the top i think!

If girls are more active, and I get prggo with one, Im in BIG TROUBLE.

[jennica]

I've tried the Chinese predictor charts, but each one is different. Some say boy, some say girl. I'm not sure which one is the accurate one to follow

[organicpapayamama]

both my girls were less active (in general) than ds.

[LadyCatherine185]

My DS was extremely active in utero. Hardly ever stopped moving. He is still that way now at 19 months old. A friend of mine had a boy 7 months ago, and he didn't move much at all in utero, and is the most laid back baby I've ever seen. I think it totally depends on the baby.

[leurMaman]

I wouldn't say so - i've had 3 pregnancies worth of kicks. I felt my son was really active in a different way - but each child was active.

[jennica]

Ha, so I guess my theory based on a sampling of about three moms was wrong! Go figure Whatever this baby is, it is quite a bit more active at this point than Ds was!

[Peony]

I have had boys and girls, no connection what so ever on anything during pg. My most high needs child was not that active during the pg, but come 2 weeks of age, she started screaming and kicking and I feel like 7 years later I have yet to find the mute or rest button on her. DD2 was normal during pg, and a normal child I guess. DS was so active during my pg, he was all over the place and he was the most laid back, mellow baby out of all of mine.

[wondertwins]

True in my case! I have b/g twins. DD was crazy busy, (I had numerous u/s for various reasons, and from 20 weeks on they kept to their own sides, so I knew which one was kicking me!) and DS at times made me nervous with his inactivity. DD would wake me up with her squirming and certain foods sent her into overdrive. DD's heart rate was always higher than DS's as well.

As for a reflection on their personalities, maybe. DS does need more sleep than DD and he is more contemplative. DD was more fidgety as a baby and crawled and walked earlier. But now they are almost 3 and I don't think the generalizations are so clear cut.

[IAMommy]

I'm on my second boy. DS1 was non-stop active, I used to wonder if he slept in there at all. He is still pretty active, but not hyper or anything. This little guy (which I thought was a girl, all the Chinese predictors thought was a girl), is so laid back that I have to bother him frequently to make sure all is well.
To add to the confusion, DS1 had an anterior placenta and this one has a posterior, but I felt DS1 move much earlier. I think it mostly comes down to temperament.