Reya Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 I've only gained 4 lbs since conception, I'm reasonably slim (WELL within healthy range) and only average height, and my other babies were small, so I don't see how this one can be big. Tech asked if I was sure of conception--um, YES, YES, I am. 1) I know when I ovulated within 12 hours either direction, and 2) all my early sonograms have been dead-on for that date. Anyone else has an unexpectedly big sonogram measure? And how accurate was it if your history and weight gain make it unlikely? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happypamama Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 I usually measure several weeks ahead until the third trimester, when it levels off a bit. And I've never gained much weight; I think the most was maybe 30 pounds (that was the nearly 10-pound baby at 41 weeks), and last time, I barely gained ten. (That baby was only 8 pounds and was born at 38.5 weeks, but he was on track to be over 9 pounds like his brothers if he'd waited to be born.) I also only gain in the belly, not the face or anywhere else. I have also read that even in utero, babies can grow at different rates, especially after the first trimester, so maybe your little one has just had a bit of a growth spurt and will grow more slowly in the next few weeks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pippen Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 With all three pregnancies I had a big growth surge around 5 months. It was especially pronounced with my 10 lb 5 ounce kiddo, even though I only gained 26 pounds by the end. I went five days past my due date and I knew exact date of conception. My doctor never the measuring ahead or measuring behind business with me. The first time he got on me about the weight gain, but not the next time around based on my history. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reya Posted December 15, 2012 Author Share Posted December 15, 2012 AAAAAK! All these big babies are scaring me. :-) My "big" one was 7lbs 2oz. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyMommy Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 If your early sonograms were on track I wouldn't worry to much about it. I remember from my pregnancies they always told me weight / size measurements are less accurate as you get further along. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
momtoamiracle Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 my dr thought for sure my boy would be around 8lbs. He was less than 7. I wouldn't worry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kathryn Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 I think it's different for different people. In my case, my 20 week ultrasound was more accurate than the earlier ones. But, I think it's usually the other way around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphus Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 The later the ultrasound, the less reliable it is. My "big" baby was a certain 42 weeker (dates were in stone due to hubby's being home just 1 daynthat month, lol) and instead of the 10 pounder they predicted she was 7. My on time baby with fuzzy dates was measuring big too- and was 5 pounds and found to be actually 4 weeks premature when born (dates were really, really fuzzy, lol). in both cases they were giving me these estimates and due dates based on ultrasounds done at 16 weeks or more, changing them often, trying to get me to induce with number 1, etc. The dates and sizes changed pretty much every time I had an ultrasound, basically. It's not an exact science. If you know dates, I'd just go with yours- I was truly clueless when it could have been with number two ( I had wonky periods, we weren't trying, I didn't get to a dr until 18 weeksish) so I pretty much had to go with whatever they could guesstimate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lolly Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 My big baby was induced because of ultrasound measurements. It was anticipated that he would be over 9 lbs. After my 3 preemies, that was quite scary! So, I was induced so that he wouldn't be even larger. He came out weighing 6 lbs 13 oz. So, no, those ultrasounds can be quite off! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reya Posted December 15, 2012 Author Share Posted December 15, 2012 Okay, I'm liking these replies better! Haha! :p No big babies. Noooooo big babies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farrar Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 They underestimated mine. I'm convinced that sonogram "measuring" should actually be called sonogram "guessing." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chepyl Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 I never measured big or ahead and Matthew was 9lbs 11oz. They did note his large umbilical cord at the ultra sound and birth.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soror Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 I wouldn't give it any thought at all and 1 wk isn't that much difference anyway. I had one at 36 wks and my measurements were all over the place, my baby was perfectly average though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redsquirrel Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 as my family doctor likes to say, "the only reliable way to know how big a baby is to put it on a scale." One week off is nothing. At your next appointment you could measure one week behind. It is nothing to concern yourself with. My eldest son was born two months prematurely. Less than an hour before he was born I was measured every way possible by the high risk Obstetrician guy. I had one of those super (at the time) hi-def ultrasounds to try to know how big he would be when he was born. His skull and femur were measured etc. I was told, given all they could see, that I should expect a one pound baby. 45 mins later I gave birth to a four and a half pound baby. It is just really, really hard to know how big a baby is without being able to weigh and measure it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gardenmom5 Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 not. as the baby get's bigger, changes position, you have more aminotic fluid all things that can make you measure bigger. Ultrasounds can be off by more than 1lb+. (think - that is more than 10% of the average baby's size.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boscopup Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 Mine have all measured ahead at that point, except the last one who was my biggest baby. First was born at 29 weeks, but he was the size of a 31 weeker. The other two were full term and around 7 1/2 lbs. I just flash cook my kids, so they came out average size at 36w6d. I would not freak out about measuring 1 week ahead at 20 weeks. Also, my most painful birth was the 3lb 13oz baby. Fat is squishy. Don't be afraid of a bigger baby. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LMD Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 I measured huge with ds1, the midwife asked if it was twins! My ds2 was nearly a pound bigger at birth 9 lb 8oz but always measured perfectly... Ftr, my biggest was my easiest birth by far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plateau Mama Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 Okay, I'm liking these replies better! Haha! :p No big babies. Noooooo big babies. Don't be frightened by big babies. My 9 pounder was my easiest delivery. By far. My other two were 7.12 &7.13. Also your size really has nothing to do with babies size. My family is short, except for me, they all come in at 5.2 or shorter. 10 pound babies are normal in my family. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KungFuPanda Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 Okay, I'm liking these replies better! Haha! :p No big babies. Noooooo big babies. My 9 lb baby was a MUCH easier (natural) delivery than my 5 1/2 lb (induced) baby. They were both born a few days after my due date. I'm short, fine-boned, and have narrow hips. In my experience the way I went into labor mattered A LOT more than the birthweight. I didn't need stitches with either child. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.