37 weeks considered full term?

[akmbloom]

I'm at 37 weeks today - last time I was at the midwife she said something about 37 weeks being full term, and I've read that a couple of places too... with my older daughter (born almost 6 years ago), I was always told that 38 weeks was full term, and a nurse told me something like "well that baby needs to cook another week at least!" with this baby.  Mainly just curious, but also I had a little bit of bloody-tinged mucous this morning so maybe this isn't just an rhetorical question anymore :)  what have you heard?

[Tumble Bumbles]

I think closer to 40 weeks is ideal but midwives here can deliver at home as long as the mama is at least 36 weeks, so they must consider that full-term "enough" to be able to safely deliver and stay at home. I think you should be fine! Congrats :)

[lyterae]

I'm with you on the 38 weeks being full-term, however I also know that once I hit 36 weeks I'm cleared for my homebirth.

[tourist.]

I'm also cleared for homebirth at 36w although most books I've read consider 37w full term.

[jcregan]

I think the 37w range is usually the where the risks of baby coming early are highly reduced and in most cases the baby being born at that time would not pose problems.  My understanding is that there could maybe be a slightly higher risk of breathing issues with a 37 week baby, and it would like be a bit smaller, but I think it is not technically considered "premature" at that time.

But it is not really the full normal gestational period of 40-41 weeks so I think the term "full term" is kind of misleading.

[MegBoz]

Technically "full term" indeed starts at 37W and goes through 42W (whereas 42W 1D starts "post-dates") So yes, the entire 5-week range is still "full term," within the range of healthy & normal.

Personally, I've heard some stories of babies having trouble with BFing at 37W, so I also agree with that nurse that "baby needs to cook another week" - but I think other problems with prematurity, such as breathing, are greatly reduced at 37W and it's fine to HB at 37W.

I think it's also just so individual. My son hung out until 41W4D. He was only 7# 4oz- no signs of "post-maturity" (such as wrinkled skin) & he was VERY strong! LOL, probably why I got cracked nipples - but at least I built up a fantastic milk supply!

So that was just exactly the right gestational time for him. Therefore I have trouble imagining that my baby now would be just fine at only 37W. I'm actually hoping not to deliver before 39W.

I don't know if there's any research on prevalence of BFing problems with babies born full-term, but earlier full term (37W - 38W), it's just something I have a silly paranoia about - Ha - my MW has already told me to stop worrying about it.

[nia82]

Yes they consider 37 weeks as full-term, probably because of lung maturity at that point. DS was born at 37 weeks and 2 days (my water just broke and labor started on its own) and he was very little and so jaundiced that he had a weak latch and we had to use the SNS system and a nipple shield to get him to eat, not to mention to tickle him, undress him to stay awake. That all got better within 3 days when he just nursed fine with the nipple shield, but it's typical for 37 weekers I was told. I'm hoping to cook baby a tad longer this time - today I'm at 37w2d so I think DD will maybe make it to 38 weeks, maybe even more, who knows!

[~Amy~]

Originally Posted by nia82 

Yes they consider 37 weeks as full-term, probably because of lung maturity at that point. DS was born at 37 weeks and 2 days (my water just broke and labor started on its own) and he was very little and so jaundiced that he had a weak latch and we had to use the SNS system and a nipple shield to get him to eat, not to mention to tickle him, undress him to stay awake. That all got better within 3 days when he just nursed fine with the nipple shield, but it's typical for 37 weekers I was told. I'm hoping to cook baby a tad longer this time - today I'm at 37w2d so I think DD will maybe make it to 38 weeks, maybe even more, who knows!

We had many of the same issues with my son at 39 weeks.  I wish he had had another week or 2 to cook.  

[akmbloom]

Thanks everyone!  I haven't had any further signs for the moment, and I'm hoping to go a little longer (but not long enough as to have to be induced, as with my 1st!).  I'm trying to mentally prepare myself for any time now, though.

[BabyBearsMummy]

Birth after 37 weeks are considered full term. Babies born after 37 weeks will be treated as a full term birth by medical staff at a hospital. Most babies tend to arrive in a four week block between 38 and 41 weeks without medical interferance.

[mylilmonkeys]

I actually had some bloody show at 37 weeks with one of my pregnancies, and birthed a few days after 40 weeks.  This was my 5th, so I was very positive about the show.  It was a little freaky to me, too, because I've never delivered before 40 weeks, most of mine going to 42 weeks!  So here's hoping for another week or two for your peace of mind! :)

[MegBoz]

Originally Posted by BabyBearsMummy 

Most babies tend to arrive in a four week block between 38 and 41 weeks without medical interferance.

Actually it's a 5-week block from 37-42 weeks. The actual average for first time Moms is 41W1D, so for first-timers- there are plenty AFTER 41W1D, as well as plenty before. (See Mittendorf's meta-analysis done in the 1990s on the length of uncomplicated human gestation.)

OP - you don't have to consent to be induced just because you're "late". While it is true the risk of stillbirth goes up after 41W, it's still very very low. One of the best summaries I've read of the research is in the book, "Gentle Birth" by Dr. Sarah Buckley.

[katroshka]

From what I have read, the 40 week thing is pretty arbitrary, it's kind of a nice round number in the right range. Every baby is different, every pregnancy is different, and due dates aren't an exact science!

When I was pregnant with my first I had been on bedrest for 2.5 months due to threatened preterm labor. My midwife and the OB she worked with on riskier pregnancies decided to take me off bedrest at 36 weeks because my daughter was measuring a good size and they said that given how big she was it was very likely that her lungs were well developed enough. I gave birth at 38 weeks and she weighed 7 lbs 7 oz and 20.5", and was perfect healthy in every way. My second was also born right at 38 weeks, she was 7 lbs and 1 oz and 21.5", and also perfectly healthy. I'm pretty sure a week before would have been fine for either of them.

[Veritaserum]

37 - 42 weeks is term.

My first was induced at 39.5 weeks. My last four were all spontaneous home births at 37 - 38.5 weeks. None of my babies had problems with breastfeeding or lung maturity. I think my uterus must bake babies quickly.

Babies induced at 37 - 39 weeks tend to have more trouble than babies born spontaneously at those gestations.

[akmbloom]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MegBoz 

OP - you don't have to consent to be induced just because you're "late". While it is true the risk of stillbirth goes up after 41W, it's still very very low. One of the best summaries I've read of the research is in the book, "Gentle Birth" by Dr. Sarah Buckley.

Yeah - I will probably try to wait longer this time if it comes to that - my first went to 42W + one day, but I think induction was a contributing factor to some complications & unnecessary interventions I had, so I really want to avoid it if at all possible.  I had an OB last time, and MWs this time who said they'd be more OK with trying alternatives to induction first if the situation is all OK otherwise.