I was just wondering why my older sister was born slightly early (just under 37 weeks), and my younger brother was induced at 36 weeks kas he was moving to much or something (im not really sure why.) and you have me in the middle, I was due on December 12th but wasn't born until February 10th, with underdeveloped lungs. Those two weighed between 5.5 to 6 pounds and I was near 7.
I was wondering why there was a massive difference....
Sorry if this is the wrong forum for this type of question. I just google'd birth questions forum and this looked good /shrug.
Sounds hinky. Either someone got dates wrong, or someone wasn't being wholly truthful. Probably a mistake or a mishear.
Adina mama to B 4/06 and E 8/13/12 (on her due date!)
Fairly sure that there was either an inadvertent or intentional mix up about dates. All three probably came close to 40 weeks.
Happy , delayed/selective vaxxing, WOHM to DD1 4/10 , DD2 8/12 and partner/wife for thirteen years to SAHD DH.
Or your dad might've gone out of town and she got knocked up while he was gone and told him that conception happened before he left...sure, could also happen, but I certainly wouldn't jump to that conclusion!
I was born in the mid-70s and I don't think they were as accurate about dating then, just using LMP and that's it (ultrasounds were very rudimentary). I too was supposedly ridiculously late (like, 6 weeks).
In my case, nothing hinky - I am clearly, clearly related to both of my parents.
Despite my supposed "lateness," my mom's doctor didn't freak or anything, it was no big deal. That makes me think that they would see "off" dates all the time then.
Homeschooling mama to 6 year old DD.
I think our dates are much more accurate these days, with ultrasounds. Also, going off of your LMP is pretty unpredictable. My cycles are very regular, but I think I ovulate later than most women. My first was 10 days late and my second was born at nearly 43 weeks going by the LMP, and I was 100% sure of that date. The ultrasound date made her about 42 weeks, though.