"You're having a big baby" poll - Page 3 - Mothering Forums

View Poll Results: Were you told you were having a "big" baby?
I was told I was having a big baby and I had a big baby. 94 35.34%
I was told I was having a big baby and I had an average or small baby. 71 26.69%
I was not told I was having a big baby. 101 37.97%
Voters: 266. You may not vote on this poll

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#61 of 108 Old 03-31-2007, 02:52 PM
 
Novella's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Rural Canada - peaceful prairie
Posts: 1,181
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
My doctor didn't speculate on the size of the baby in my first pregnancy, save to say that I think we all assumed the baby would be on the bigger side (ie. at least 8lb) as I approached full-term (40wk4days). This was simply a suspicion based on: my husband and I are tall, we both weighed more than 8lbs at brth. Our daughter was 9lb 14.25oz.

For DD #2, the inevitable discussion about induction came up (even though Doc knew we were opposed) as I went to 41wks. They did an ultrasound that afternoon (went into labour later and she was born that night). But Doc had no interest in the weight/size estimates from the ultrasound - just other observations. He had told me that while ultrasound can be extremely accurate in the early part of the pregnancy, it is notoriously inaccurate in late stages. He said as a medical student, he saw several cases where the late-third-trimester ultrasounds indicated weights off by around 2lbs!

I know of a woman in town who had a c-section for her first after many hours in labour. The baby was high-10s. For her second, they considered this, did a near-term ultrasound, and ordered a c-section for that "huge" baby she was carrying, certain she would never be able to birth it. That second baby boy was a good bit under 8lbs.

I don't think the baby's weight/size has much to do with anything. You'll stretch as much as you need to - so I really can't figure out why the caregivers seem to get so fluttery about trying to figure out what the weight will be at birth anyway. It really just doesn't matter! DS#1 was 11lb1oz and that was a super smooth, easy birth. Checking him out, the Doc kept marvelling about "those BIG feet!" but even having looked at the baby, he was shocked by the weight, having thought our son was between 9lb and 10lb.

We had lots of frequent ultrasounds with our new twins. The last one was a week before they were born. The OB said to expect babies that were 5lb and 5.5lb. We were disappointed by this. They arrived at 7lb8oz and 6lb15oz. (ie. 2 pounds more than she thought). So again, they really just can't tell by ultrasounds at the end!

Six kids, sixth sense, six degrees of separation. . . from sanity!
Not sure that I'm crunchy, but definitely a "tough chew".
Novella is offline  
#62 of 108 Old 03-31-2007, 02:57 PM
 
hempmama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 483
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Told I was having a high 8 or 9 pounder, had a 9.5 pounder (2 weeks late, estimation was just after my due date)

The second one was supposedly "the same size," and was 9 pounds even.
hempmama is offline  
#63 of 108 Old 04-01-2007, 10:29 PM
 
goddessgold1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: mother earth...
Posts: 177
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
With my last son they estimated with an us that my son was 9 pounds, very scarey to me, but he was 6-4.... imagine my surprise...
goddessgold1 is offline  
#64 of 108 Old 04-01-2007, 11:44 PM
 
mikayla's mama's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 137
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by QueenOfThePride View Post

Mother's intuition is way more accurate!

I haven't read through the whole thread but...

My OB actually said that the mother is a better predictor of baby's weight than ultrasound.

My first was guessed to be about 7lbs by belly size... she was almost 9 pounds which made for a difficult labor for me, along with other issues we had.

With the second I had multiple size scans, OB was worried about another difficult delivery and I was asked if I wanted to just do a C-section. They predicted her to be about 8.5 pounds 3 days before I had her. I felt she was quite a bit smaller than my first and she was over a pound lighter and had a smooth easy delivery.
mikayla's mama is offline  
#65 of 108 Old 04-01-2007, 11:53 PM
 
lifescholar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 470
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I was told my baby was big. I knew he was going to be big. I was 10 lbs. 6 oz. and his father was 9.5 lbs., both first babies. So, it was kind of a no-brainer.

My OB was not concerned at all. He never induces before 41 wks 3 days without good medical reason, and I was no different.

My son was born through induction at 41 wks 6 days, and weighed 8 lbs. 11 oz., a lot smaller than I'd expected! But, he was obviously post-dates, had passed a lot of meconium, and was a bit dehydrated. He was also 22", and his head circumference was 14.5". His length and HC were "off the charts", but his weight was 90th percentile, I think. So, I estimate that he was probably just over 9 lbs. at his heaviest, before birth. That's still pretty small compared to what I was expecting!!

FTR, the ultrasound tech who did the NST at 41 wks 2 days wouldn't guess as to the weight. She said they can't do that. She said she could tell by looking at my belly that I was going to have a big baby! lol

I considered him to be "big", not "huge". To me, "huge" is over 10 lbs.

Mom to two amazing boys, C (July 2005) and D (May 2010)

Founder/leader of a Babywearing group, and loving it!

lifescholar is offline  
#66 of 108 Old 04-02-2007, 12:02 AM
 
Snowdrift's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 5,669
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I had dual care. My homebirth midwives validated my feelings that I'd have a big baby (my sibs and I were big), but reminded me that there's no real certainty.

My back-up cnm decided I had high sugar and possible gd because I got 125 on the one-hour gtt and refused the three hour and had some yeast issues. (I hadn't planned on doing the one hour, had a white flour pancake b-fast with dh right before going to the appt. it's a freaking miracle that after that my sugar was *only* 125!). So, she was convinced that I would have a huge baby but said it could be ok because I have nice big hips. Um...ok...

I liked her, as far as medicos go, but I was really shocked to hear a cnm talk about my good birthin' hips. Not exactly um, evidence based...
Snowdrift is offline  
#67 of 108 Old 04-02-2007, 12:09 AM
 
treemom2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Belgium
Posts: 3,803
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
With DD I was told she was going to be a big baby, maybe 10 lbs. She was born at 37 weeks 8lbs 4 oz.

With DS I wasn't told anything about how big he was going to be. No one was worried about it even though I was an HBAC. He was 8lbs 6oz.

Now I am living in Japan and the doc and midwife have lectured me all during this pregnancy about how they don't want me to gain any weight at all (I am overweight) and they want me to have a 7lb baby: Last Saturday, midwife guessed weight through palpation at around 9lbs and was a little freaked by that. She said bigger babies make it harder for the uterus to clamp down and may cause hemorraging. I'm not too worried, I figured the babe would be around 9lbs just because they do tend to get bigger each time. No induction talk yet though.

Barbara:  an always learning SAHM of Ilana (11) and Aiden (8) living in Belgium with my amazing husband.

treemom2 is offline  
#68 of 108 Old 04-02-2007, 12:15 AM
 
IfMamaAintHappy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 2,531
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
based on uterine palpation, my midwife told me my baby was between 7 and 8 pounds at 38 weeks. I had her 10 days later and she ws 9 lbs 4. Same with my third child, and she ws 9 lbs 0.
IfMamaAintHappy is offline  
#69 of 108 Old 04-02-2007, 10:48 PM
 
AbbieB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,279
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I measured 4 cm ahead all along. My HB midwifwe and I knew DD was gonna be a big girl (most of the babies in her practice are on the upper end of the size spectrum because she encourages a really great diet). I was sooooo huge! Plus my mom is much smaller than me and both my sister and I were over 8 lbs.

The back up hospital staff that saw me were all saying she would be 7 lbs or so.

She was 10.3!

One happy momma joy.gif to a very spirited little girl dust.gif, her tough little brother superhero.gif, and a happy little suprise late April 2012 stork-suprise.gif. Wife to an overworked and under paid husband geek.gif.

AbbieB is offline  
#70 of 108 Old 04-03-2007, 08:30 PM
 
lyttlewon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,307
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I don't remember if I was told so I voted the last. DD was 8-12 and 22 inches. I was not induced due to size but due to blood pressure. I was 40 weeks.
lyttlewon is offline  
#71 of 108 Old 04-03-2007, 08:43 PM
 
KIMBER1983's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Red Deer, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 323
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The u/s tech told me that my baby had a "big belly" and was already over 6 lbs when I was 7 months pregnant.
I had a baby at 40W6D, weighing 9 lbs 10 oz.
Natural birth.
KIMBER1983 is offline  
#72 of 108 Old 10-06-2007, 04:13 PM
 
georgia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: tl;dr
Posts: 25,918
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


and another "big baby" thread here.

I have retired from administration work, so if you have a question about anything MDC-related, please contact Cynthia Mosher. Thanks!
 
georgia is offline  
#73 of 108 Old 10-06-2007, 08:26 PM
 
JanetF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,467
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
#1 "Well he was too big you'd never have got him out anyway. Go on a diabetic diet and grow a smaller baby next time." First mw, planned hb turned tf to c/s. 4kgs. Retrospective justification? Just maybe!

#2 "You've got a really big baby in there, already over 4 kgs and you're at high risk of another c/s" Second mw, planned hbac turned freebirth, baby born 3 days after size estimation. 3.7kgs.
JanetF is offline  
#74 of 108 Old 10-06-2007, 09:12 PM
 
crsta33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,804
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
We knew he was big by feel/measurement, not by u/s. I had guessed he'd be around 9 lbs, but he weighed 10 lbs 7 oz.

7 hour natural labor at home preceded by ROM. Out in one big and two little pushes, one small tear that didn't require stitches.

Christa
crsta33 is offline  
#75 of 108 Old 10-06-2007, 09:59 PM
 
prothyraia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The Borean Tundra
Posts: 2,317
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikayla's mama View Post
My OB actually said that the mother is a better predictor of baby's weight than ultrasound.
My first pregnancy, I measured average for dates the whole time, had the 'standard' ultrasound at 20 weeks, my MW guessed about 8lbs by palpations (but said babies make liars of her all the time), and I swore up and down that my baby was going to be .big. He was 9'15
prothyraia is offline  
#76 of 108 Old 10-07-2007, 01:28 AM
 
cj'smommy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,931
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I was told I was having a seven pounder, Connor was 9 pds. 2 oz.

Mommy of 3 super charged kiddos
cj'smommy is offline  
#77 of 108 Old 10-07-2007, 01:32 AM
 
Lizzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,445
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
With my first- I was told "This baby will not be 6lbs" Meaning- he wont be HUGE, but he wont be teeny. He was 9lb 1oz.
With my second...well...at first, the midwife thought he was small, so she sent me to her back up for an ultrasound- I measured 2.5 weeks ahead(this was at 31 weeks). Ok, no big deal. Then, after that, she'd palpate me and say " I keep trying to convince myself this is not a 12lb baby".
I kept saying "No, no...I don't want a 12lb baby. This will be a 10lb baby girl" In my heart, I knew he was big(I mean...I was the size of a house)
Yeah right!
Well...he wasn't a 12 lb baby...he was nearly 13lbs-12lb 12oz and very much a boy!
So much for intuition.
Lizzo is offline  
#78 of 108 Old 10-07-2007, 06:32 AM
 
Datura's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 826
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Hmm, well at 38 weeks my midwife told me that he was 9 lbs plus. Sure enough, right on his due date he came out at 10 lbs 2 oz. I love homebirth midwives, her saying was "your body won't grow a baby bigger than you can birth."
Datura is offline  
#79 of 108 Old 10-07-2007, 09:49 AM
 
pampered_mom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Somewhere short of crazy
Posts: 4,535
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by BetsyS View Post
The midwife told me that she thought the baby was big. "I guess I could offer you a scan if you want it." I declined, because current ACOG recommendations are not induction, but straight to c-section for over 5000 gms.
I'm so nitpicky, but I don't want others reading this thread to think that's actually true. If you read the ACOG guideline itself (not that I put much weight in anything the ACOG has to say) you find out something very different. The guidline reads:

Quote:
Although the diagnosis of fetal macrosomia is imprecise, prophylactic cesarean delivery may be considered for suspected fetal macrosomia with estimated fetal weights greater than 5,000 g in women without diabetes and greater than 4,500 g in women with diabetes.
AND is actually a Level C recommendation which means that it's not based upon evidence at all, but is actually "based primarily on consensus and expert opinion". :

With ds I was told that he was over 10lbs after a late term u/x. At birth he was 9lbs even, but lost so much weight I sincerely doubt that was his true birth weight.
pampered_mom is offline  
#80 of 108 Old 10-07-2007, 04:38 PM
 
*Aimee*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,965
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
My OB said that DS was going to be 12lbs or so. Based on nothing except that DH was 12lbs when he was born. I only gained 9lbs with the pregnancy (I'm overweight so its okay ). He said I was measuring 2w early and I needed to talk C section. He said if I didnt then the baby would get stuck and they'd have to break my pelvis to get him out. Well DS came a month early exactly and weighed 6lbs 14 oz. So while that *is* big I dont think he would have gained another 6lbs.
*Aimee* is offline  
#81 of 108 Old 10-07-2007, 04:41 PM
 
ann_of_loxley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Gloucestershire, UK
Posts: 5,454
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I was not told I was having a big baby...and he was 10lbs 4.5oz! lol
(no GD either)

Mummy me : > Thats Ann! and my beautiful SONS Duncanand Hamish 19/09/05 & 22/04/10!
ann_of_loxley is offline  
#82 of 108 Old 10-07-2007, 04:45 PM
 
mhenry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 977
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I had an ultrasound to try and pinpoint the size. The ultrasound tech said, ds would probably be 7lbs, he was 9lbs13oz.
mhenry is offline  
#83 of 108 Old 10-07-2007, 04:48 PM
 
BetsyS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: world of craziness
Posts: 5,387
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pampered_mom View Post
I'm so nitpicky, but I don't want others reading this thread to think that's actually true. If you read the ACOG guideline itself (not that I put much weight in anything the ACOG has to say) you find out something very different. The guidline reads:



AND is actually a Level C recommendation which means that it's not based upon evidence at all, but is actually "based primarily on consensus and expert opinion". :
.
We read the same thing; we're just interpreting it differently. ACOG does NOT recommend induction for fetal macrosomia. They have a level C (which is weak) recommendation for c-sections for cases of fetal macrosomia.

I didn't want to be placed in the position of choosing to step outside ACOG guidelines (and go for an induction), to choose to go with ACOG guidelines (no matter how weak) and have a c-section without a "trial of labor," or to be the problem patient and decline both interventions. That's why I made the choice to decline the ultrasound and never get the diagnosis (macrosomia) that would start the cascade of needing to make a choice.
BetsyS is offline  
#84 of 108 Old 10-07-2007, 04:50 PM
 
MilkTrance's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: a small, old house
Posts: 5,214
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I was told I was eating too much.

Then I had a 9lb+ baby and lost THIRTY POUNDS a week after delivery.

A big PFFFFFFFT to everyone, basically.
MilkTrance is offline  
#85 of 108 Old 10-07-2007, 06:04 PM
 
BirthFree's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 2,141
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I had midwifery care for the first two (did my own prenatal care this last time) - no one said anything about weight guesstimates.
Measured 41w: 7.11oz baby (39w 0d)
Measured 36w: 8.8oz baby (38w 0d)
Measured 42w: 9.12oz baby (38w 3d)

I was shocked at how big our last baby was - he was BY FAR the easiest to push out (maybe 5 min. total?) and is obviously the biggest of my 3. I actually would like to birth a 10lb baby one day just to blow people's minds. Lol!

I'm pretty slight and of average height. My DH was a bigger baby but I was born at 30w (set of twins) so I have no idea what I would have been. Either way, the fat squishes easy!

Mama to 4 amazing little people, another little expected 3/6/12!
Avid Unassisted Birth supporter/Mama

BirthFree is offline  
#86 of 108 Old 10-07-2007, 07:36 PM
 
MamaFern's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: surrounded by snowy mountains
Posts: 7,575
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
with my first i was told by my first midwife that i had a Huge baby in there, but i switched practitioners at about 30 weeks and she settled my fears about it. he turned out to be textbook average. 7lbs 8oz

with my second i knew she was a big baby because iu was huge and she was 2 weeks overdue. she was 10lbs 5oz

this one im 26 weeks and im already being told its a "big baby" not by my midwife, just everyone else

 

 

Quote:
Once in while you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right....

 

MamaFern is offline  
#87 of 108 Old 10-07-2007, 07:45 PM
 
Iris' Mom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,449
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Yes, for my last 2, I was told I was having a big baby, and they were bigger than ave., but not huge (8'13" and 8'3"). But I was told the same thing w/ dd, and she was only 6"5".
Iris' Mom is offline  
#88 of 108 Old 10-08-2007, 08:52 AM
 
pixiepunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Hampshire County, WV
Posts: 4,231
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
i wouldn't necessarily say i was told my first was going to be big. but at my 37 week appointment i was told that she was already approx. 8 pounds. She was born a week and a half later, and weighed 6 lb. 13 oz. obviously quite a bit less than 8.

that was just from the m/w palpating my baby, not from an u/s, and no one was trying to warn me about how big she was going to be or try to get me to induce or anything like that, but they were pretty wrong

With DS i don't remember anyone trying to make an estimate about his size, though the m/w did look surprised that he was 9 pounds. i wasn't surprised, though, i was *waaaaay* huger with him than with my DD!
pixiepunk is offline  
#89 of 108 Old 10-08-2007, 04:14 PM
 
pampered_mom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Somewhere short of crazy
Posts: 4,535
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by BetsyS View Post
I didn't want to be placed in the position of choosing to step outside ACOG guidelines (and go for an induction), to choose to go with ACOG guidelines (no matter how weak) and have a c-section without a "trial of labor," or to be the problem patient and decline both interventions. That's why I made the choice to decline the ultrasound and never get the diagnosis (macrosomia) that would start the cascade of needing to make a choice.

Or do what I did...skip the OB altogther. It still boggles my mind that we as a nation allow what is in essence a trade union to set the guidelines for pregnant and birthing women. Their goal is protect the interests of their members not the health and safety of women and families. :
pampered_mom is offline  
#90 of 108 Old 10-08-2007, 11:02 PM
 
Girlprof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,029
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I honestly don't remember how it came up, but when size got mentioned, our midwife said, Oh I LOVE big babies. And you're totally capable of having a big baby - I delivered one over 11 pounds last week. She never committed to a guess on how big he would be, but of course, that was totally inspiring. When he emerged at 9 and a half pounds, even she was surprised!

Sarah
Girlprof is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off