Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Oh I've had comments like this for both my pregnancies. I constantly get told how big I am, even though I am actually exactly on the graph - 33 cm FH, 33 weeks. I explain that I think its because I'm short that I seem really big but right up to the end of my last pregnancy people kept assuring me I was having twins.


Some of my favourites were - during my last pregnancy:

Lady at work (who I actually get on well with) "Oh aren't you getting bigger!"

Me "Yes!" (rubbing bump proudly)

Lady at work "Yes front and back"


Same lady this time round (in front of entire office)

"You're a different shape this time round"

Me (warily) "Oh yes?"

"Yes your bum is bigger"

Me "Ummm ok"


I don't know why it is deemed appropriate to comment on someone's bum when they are pregnant when you wouldn't do that at any other time??


and also getting asked whether I was giving birth to a baby rhinoceros. How is that appropriate???

Oh gosh, Saila, that reminds me of the time when I took my baby, at a very tiny 5 weeks, up to Holborn to see everyone at work. On the bus there, a lady cooed over son (and rightly so!) and then said to me 'You're very brave, having another one so soon...' (still had a bit of a bump and unflattering outfit on)

Hmm. Didn't wear that coat again for a long time...

Saila and Goodliz - not sure if this was your intent, but your posts made me laugh!! Apologies if me finding it funny causes offence - I guess it's all in the context. I went through this phase in my mid pregnancy where I had the more ridiculously oversized boobs and got used to my female friends taking one look and exclaiming 'look at your t*ts!' I get called fatty all the time by my husband, which doesn't bother me (and I love how my daughter stands up for me, saying, she's not fat, she has a baby in her belly, Daddy (in a really patronising tone)). But some slimey taxi man I don't know from Adam would be a completely different story!!


I'm starting to realise I probably have said some inappropriate things in my time....

I remember someone telling me the Christmas when I was pregnant that I was 'big for a February baby'. As it happened he was IUGR (retarded growth) so he was most definitely NOT big for a February baby and came in January anyway! Did also get told by a pair of ladies I met at a public meeting how completely awful labour was and it was the worst thing ever etc. Then was quizzed by a guy in the office about whether I'd be circumcising my son (husband is Jewish) and if not, why not.

It's not just being told you're too big that can be a problem.... I saw my family for the first time in ages last w/e and had my brother tell me that I was much smaller than he was expecting me to be by this stage (26/40).


Having been feeling bit worried about how little I seem to be at the moment (and measuring only 20cm at 25/40 when the midwife measured me hoping to reassure me about my size paranoia!) I'd started feeling a bit more positive (lots of big, high feeling kicks from bubs over the week), but this put me right back! Still, seeing midwife again Monday and got 28/40 scan the following week so hopefully all will be heading in the right direction.

littleEDfamily Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Saila and Goodliz - not sure if this was your

> intent, but your posts made me laugh!! Apologies

> if me finding it funny causes offence - I guess

> it's all in the context.


No offence taken - it was meant as a humorous contribution to the thread - true though!

Thank you very much all - your stories are all brilliant! As I stood on the tube this morning with no one offering their seat I too was struck by the irony of suddenly the 'huge' bump becoming invisible! Also I have to apologise to my husband he read my post and was hurt that I'd implied he hadn't been supportive - he's always telling me how nice I look, so really don't have anything to complain about on that front! Didn't realise he'd sussed my pseudonym - damn! I loved all the mother and mother-in-law stories too - you'd think having been through it themselves they'd be a little more sensitive!


Anyway - am loving all your stories! It is a very weird thing to have your body not only changing so much - but it being something people seem to feel is public property - but no doubt it is all worth it in the end!


I'm just glad I don't live in Italy anymore - when I did live there for a short period - it was amazing how often little old ladies would come up and tell me my shoes weren't appropriate for my outfit or some other comment on my appearance. Can't imagine what its like being pregnant and living in a country where people aren't famed for their reserve like they supposedly are here!

yak: i totally agree about when your trying but with no luck. that's why i posted the comment about people asking you why you're not drinking and immediately asking. i tried for a couple of years and at different stages thought i should stop drinking etc... but the comments drove me mad.


also, once i was married all the 'ooh you'd better get on and have kids' comments etc... just get out of my life. i know people are just trying to make conversation but there's plenty more going on in the world!

Plimsoul, I'll see your 'When are the kids coming along, then???' and raise you a 'Oh, you're pregnant! And unmarried! Who's the father?'.

Yes, someone at work actually said this to me. 'Errrr, my fiancee who I live with perhaps??' was my clever retort. Her response? 'Well you just don't know nowadays, do you?'

SOD OFF, HAG-FEATURES!!!. Anyway, am married now (to my 'baby daddy') so...er...up hers???

With regards the giving up your seat on the bus/tube thing, someone posted THIS in the lounge section a while ago.


Mrs Keef was once surrounded by a group of yoots in the street, but one of them decided she was pregnant (she wasn't at the time). She came to meet me, and said she wasn't sure whether to be releived at not being mugged, or just plain mortified.

Ooh, you've just made me remember the only comment that actually really offended me.... when I told people at work I was pregnant, seriously about 5 people asked "Was it planned?". I wish I had countered with some gruesome tale I had made up about the condom breaking or something even grosser to make them feel maximally uncomfortable.


I was a 30 something at the time, had been living with my boyf-now-husband for years and we had just bought a house. It wasn't as if I was the single, promiscuous office bike! (and even if I was, that comment would have been out of order).

LittleEDfamily /Ruth - I've had some similar comments - I was at a good friend's wedding the other day and her father (someone I've known for years) came up to me and said 'I hear congratulations are in order . . . now HOW did it happen? Don't tell me - you had a bug' . I think he was trying to be funny but it wasn't and you could tell that he would be mortified if his daughter had had a child out of wedlock. I'm glad my parents are a little more open minded.

Ooh, it makes my blood boil! A lot of DH's Portuguese family said 'oooh noooooo' when we announced the pregnancy. Then promptly asked when we were getting married.

I had a colleague that used to make a lot of 'unwed, teenage mother' jokes at me. I like to think he was bitter because he was 46 and his most meaningful relationship was with his copy of The Daily Star...

EXACTLY the same thing happened to me... and at work too


lived together for years, in our 30s & just bought family sized house etc


SHOCK-HORROR we decided to start a family and skip the wedding bit (saving money and time)


I went into our semi-annual board mtg.


None of the greying old board members said congrats and then in the tea break one of them cornered me and sternly said,

'Yes.. i heard about your news. A baby's a big commitment you know'

'Who's going to look after it?'


My lovely (female) boss interjected and said,

'There is such a thing as childcare'


I sloped off and cried in the loos


:(

What a bore that bloke sounds like, Saila.

When my Mum got up the duff with my little sister, she hadn't married my Stepfather yet. She'd been with him for 8 years, loving together for 5 though. Anyway, her brother found out she was pregnant and suggested she had a termination because the baby would be bullied for having unwed parents!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Call me juvenile, but I found the idea of my child being a 'bast*rd' quite hysterically funny. It's such a load of tosh that old fashioned stuff. Makes me want to rebel! It still makes my blood boil when my father in law sends Christmas cards made out to Mr & Mrs Joe Bloggs, even when he knows I have kept my last name (and what sort of loser would stand to be called by their husband's first name!!). I also love it when people who have met me first assume my husband has the same last name as me and automatically call him by my name.


But I am now way off track.....

The novelty of being (setting myself up for a stalking here, ho hum) Mrs Nicholas Baldock hasn't worn thin yet, but I do agree with you, LittleEd, it's an old fashioned tradition. My Mum has never taken any of her husband's last names (I'm making her sound like Elizabeth Taylor- she's only been married twice). She took on her Mother's maiden name when she was 18 and has stuck to it. Good for her, I say.

Now the big question is whether to bother re-registering Baldock Jr now that I'm married. The registrar seemed to think it was a must...dunno though.

HUGE tangent, sorry.

never took my husbands name. flipped a coin when boys were born to see which family name they took, i cried! fate was against me/them depending which way you look at it ;)


back to rude comments, one that really winds me up is how people feel totally at ease asking a mum of twins is she went through IVF. it's none of your business how i got pregnant? do you ask mum's of singletons?


also, STUPID alert: telling people you are expecting identical twins and being asked boy and a girl then?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Last week we had no water for over 24 hours and very little support from Thames Water when we called - had to fight for water to be delivered, even to priority homes. Strongly suggest you contact [email protected] as she was arranging a meeting with TW to discuss the abysmal service
    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...