[umsami]

So, I just had my first u/s at what I thought was 24 weeks 1 day. Even though I have diabetes, the U/S tech was pretty confident that we should move my due date up 2 weeks...from 9/01 to 8/16. She said the amount of difference was beyond the standard deviation or whatever.<br><br>
I did not know my LMP when I got pregnant and tried to arrange an early scan, but had no luck due to lack of health insurance.<br><br>
I'd be generally O.K. with this if I didn't know that they would try and induce me at 39 weeks regardless. (All of my MFMs/OBs have done this due to diabetes.) If my original date was accurate, that would mean inducing at 36 weeks which could lead to problems.<br><br>
So, what would you do? Would you just accept the new due date? Wait and see how things go... and push back to at least a full-term induction if necessary and baby doesn't come on his own?

 

[BlackSheepPDX]

If you didn't know your LMP, and didn't have a previous US, what were you basing your dates on?

 

[Adamsmama]

<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>BlackSheepPDX</strong> <a href="/community/forum/post/15402414"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/community/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">If you didn't know your LMP, and didn't have a previous US, what were you basing your dates on?</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
I was wondering this, too.

 

[umsami]

<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>BlackSheepPDX</strong> <a href="/community/forum/post/15402414"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/community/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">If you didn't know your LMP, and didn't have a previous US, what were you basing your dates on?</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
It was a guess...but I wasn't 100% sure. I honestly don't think it was two weeks prior to that date, but I couldn't remember. I had just had an early loss about six weeks prior, and I wasn't regular yet (or so I thought).<br><br>
My midwife had told me I was measuring a little bit above, but wasn't concerned because this was my 4th baby.

 

[tootersmom]

It is my understanding that only <i>early</i> ultrasounds can accurately predict due dates. At 20+ weeks there is too much variation to get closer than a week or two at best. (At least that's what I was told by the tech at my OB's office.)

 

[MaerynPearl]

<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>tootersmom</strong> <a href="/community/forum/post/15402474"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/community/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">It is my understanding that only <i>early</i> ultrasounds can accurately predict due dates. At 20+ weeks there is too much variation to get closer than a week or two at best. (At least that's what I was told by the tech at my OB's office.)</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
<img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="/img/vbsmilies/smilies/yeahthat.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="yeah that"><br><br>
Ive been told with all three babies at my anatomy scan that being off by up to 2 weeks is perfectly normal.

 

[BlackSheepPDX]

My understanding is also that only the very early USs can give you due dates that are "accurate" and that midterm/later US are only accurate to about +/- 1 week. However a TWO week difference does seem somewhat significant. It sounds like you could maybe make an argument to split the difference, and call your date a week earlier, at 8/23, but that you should stand your ground about not getting pushed on induction/etc based on a TWO week earlier due date if it doesn't seem to make sense.<br><br>
OTOH, I DID have an early US, and got dated 1w4d LATER than my LMP would have put me, so I'm glad I have that data to back me up, since my DD was 41w5d based on a LMP due date. Helps take some of the pressure off at the end.

 

[Kelly1101]

<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>BlackSheepPDX</strong> <a href="/community/forum/post/15402600"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/community/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">My understanding is also that only the very early USs can give you due dates that are "accurate" and that midterm/later US are only accurate to about +/- 1 week. However a TWO week difference does seem somewhat significant. It sounds like you could maybe make an argument to split the difference, and call your date a week earlier, at 8/23, but that you should stand your ground about not getting pushed on induction/etc based on a TWO week earlier due date if it doesn't seem to make sense.</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
This.<br><br>
The inaccuracy of such a late u/s shouldn't result in you having to have an induction for being "late" when you may not be late.