[michaelasmommy]

I had a sono at 19 weeks and baby was only measuring 17 weeks, so they changed my due date. How accurate is it at 19 weeks? I only went by my LMP for dates, though I didn't think I was off a full 2 weeks. Maybe I'm just trying to avoid having to wait 2 more weeks. This is baby #4, and pregnancy is not fun anymore!

 

[SaraLe6]

If I had gone by my LMP with my last baby, I would have been 2 weeks off on the dates, as well. The pregnancy wheel assumes you ovulate on day 14 of your cycle but I was charting and knew that I ovulated on day 28 of my cycle. It definitely does happen. And look at the bright side.. that's two more weeks before they start harassing you about an induction and trying to scare you into forcing the baby to come when he/she is not ready.

 

[OTMomma]

The u/s's aren't perfect- but if they were going to change your dates, better for them to move it that way than the other- most likely you'll still go into labor whenever baby is ready to be born, and like the pp said- they won't be hasseling you to induce before baby is ready.

 

[cristeen]

At 19 weeks, they aren't very accurate, to answer that question. I would be concerned about how long you went with your previous pregnancies - if you went before 39 weeks with either one, having your due date moved back 2 weeks could be a problem (with them doing interventions to a mom/baby they assume is preterm). But, if you went past 40 with them, then I wouldn't worry about it, since it gives you extra time to not be harrased.

 

[PTmorgan]

I had a 20 week ultrasound, and the machine printed the estimated baby age on the screen. Right next to the age was the phrase "+/- 2 weeks". My OB also confirmed that the ultrasound can be off by up to 2 weeks at this point.

It's good that the date change places your due date later that what you figured. This will give the baby more time to arrive on its own without interference.

I know that it's tiring being pregnant and chasing after little ones. However, a date isn't going to make Baby decide to arrive any sooner or later. An artificially early date may force medical interference. This later date will calm down your care providers and hopefully give you a larger window without feeling "late".

 

[bright_eyes]

How long are your cycles? If they are longer than 28 days than you due date should be further ahead than what your lmp would put you at, since the edd charts are based on a 28 day cycle. I had my u/s with ds at 18 weeks and it dated me at 17 weeks. When I saw my OB after that she consulted with me on whether or not we should keep my due date or go with the u/s date and decided to go with my earlier date, based on the fact that my cycles are approx 38 days long. I was induced at 41 weeks (for no other reason than the fact that I was overdue) and ds had no signs of even being overdue, other than the fact that he was 10 lbs. He was still covered in a lot of vernix, so we might not have even been that overdue, I really don't know. But I am really glad we changed my date because I would have been induced a week earlier if we hadn't and he definately wouldn't have been ready to come out then.

 

[boscopup]

Unfortunately, neither your LMP nor a 19 week u/s are very accurate at dating, so either one or something in between could be correct.

Last pregnancy, I had a dating u/s that coincided with my charting-based date (the two dates were only 2 days off from each other), so we knew my dates. At the 20 week u/s, baby was measuring 22 weeks. The OB did NOT change my dates, since we had the more accurate u/s done at 7.5 weeks. Baby came at 36w6d weighing 7 lbs 4 oz (average newborn size for a 39 weeker, probably), and he was covered in vernix and had some preemie-like tendencies as you would expect from a 37 weeker. So basically, he was a slightly bigger than average baby for gestation, hence why he measured 2 weeks ahead on the 20 week u/s.

Now if I'd gone by my LMP, I would have been 9 days off on my dates, since I had long cycles.

Anyway, I'd suggest going with the new date to avoid inductions, BUT keeping in mind the original date in case things happen "early" based on the new date.

 

[j_p_i]

Same thing happened to me. My date got changed from May 6th to May 21st. May 6th is based on my LMP, May 21st is based on an ultrasound I had done at 19 weeks. I haven't had the baby yet, so I don't know for sure which will be closer to her birth day! Most people seem to believe that I'll go on the earlier side, but I'm preparing for the later date because I'd feel miserable if I were expecting May 6th, and the baby didn't come for 3 or 4 weeks. I also agree with the PPs about the idea of being able to go longer without inductions, which is why my mws are going with May 21st.

Anyway, good luck to you! I know how frustrating it can be to not feel sure of a date to keep in the back of your mind. My advice is to focus on the later date, though.

 

[writteninkursive]

If you're like me, going by LMP would be off by roughly 2 weeks. I ovulate late, and we charted and OPK'ed to get pregnant. They kept trying to tell me I was later than I was because of my LMP, but I held firm and finally they accepted my Aug 30 due date. It's important for me because I'm having my first VBA2C, and I don't need them hurrying me along at a 40 weeks that is actually only 38 weeks!

 

[AmieV]

They're supposed to be off +/- 2 weeks, but based on when I thought I was due and when baby arrived, the one I had at 22 weeks was more accurate than what I had in mind.

Honestly, it doesn't mean a hoot. I went 5 days over with my first, 3 days early with my 2nd, and almost 3 weeks over with my third. I'm nearly positive when I ovulated, and I KNOW the only time we had sex that month, but we did a bunch of date wrangling at the end...it really didn't matter because as someone mentioned, it didn't make her come until she was darn good and ready! I really wouldn't even give it a second thought.