Jump to content

Recommended Posts

This is really a question for second+ time mums...


I had a scan at 28 weeks which showed my baby to be weighing 2lb 14oz. The average weight at 28 weeks (according to BabyCentre) is 2.22lb which I take to mean a fraction over 2lb 2oz.


Does this mean I'm in line for a monster baby? Is the fetal weight from scans always accurate?

I had to have lots of scans during my pregnancy as had unequal uterine artery pressures and gestational diabetes. The point of the scans was to check the bugglet was growing properly, and each time they measured her there was an increase. However, the weight estimates must have been way off - the last scan I had was at 39wks and their estimate was 6lb 3oz, she was born 6 days later weighing 4lb 10oz!

The bugglet was all limbs though which I think threw out the equation they base estimates on.

Agree with others. Even at 40+1 they didn't think my second was going to end up 10lb 4oz (even though I warned them about big babies in the family and that my first was 9lb 4oz)! I wouldn't worry anyway. My lovely 10 pounder is now a very normal sized 5 year old.

I was consistently told that my first was a 'small' baby - I got scanned every few weeks from 20 weeks and went off buying premature clothes for when she was born, expecting her to be tiny......in the end she was totally normal and too big for all the clothes we had....my mum was delighted to have to rescue us with normal sized baby clothes.


If the scans are picking something up in terms of size then it's probably better that they are aware there is the possibility of there being an issue. It's better you/they anticipate a big/small one and then it doesn't happen than the other way around! But don't rely on it.

I was scanned on the day I went into labour and told my baby was 9lbs 12oz, and later that day she weighed in at 8lb 9oz, a friend was given extra growth scans because they kept telling her that her baby was small and she weighed in at 9lb 4oz.

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

    • What Firkins were they? The only localish ones I remember were the Phoenix and Firkin and the Fox and Firkin. The Plough has changed its name several times, and then back to the Plough, but to the best of my recollection the Uplands Tavern was named that until it became The Actress, and The Bishop was called something else whose name escapes me (though the smell from the gents lingers in my memory) but I'm pretty sure it wasn't a Firkin?
    • These statements were in the Consultation Findings report published (later than promised) just before the licence was granted:  "The site hire fee goes directly to supporting the delivery of the council’s Events service, which supports the delivery of up to 100 free-to-attend community events per year – please refer to section 1 (Licensing and income)" I've drafted an email to request some more details of these "free-to-attend" events, as "up to" is a fairly meaningless description - could be 100, could be none? - and therefore doesn't help anyone to decide whether it is actually a benefit to the community or not. Even if it is 100, I'm not sure I could name even one of them? "The site hire fee goes directly to supporting the provision of a grants fund – the Cultural Celebrations programme - please refer to section 1 (Licensing and income)" A similarly meaningless statement in terms of gauging whether, or how much, this is a benefit to the local community. What is it, what does it do, how much of the fee goes to it? And how can the fee go "directly" to two different things? Surely, "directly" means without deviation, straight to, without being changed or reduced?? Again, I'll be asking all these questions to the events dept. I find it outrageous & insulting that a public body can try to justify such an intrusive & disruptive event with such flimsy and opaque "benefits", with zero figures or details to quantify them. They may as well not bother with a consultation, just say "Look, we can't be arsed to justify our decision, it's happening so just deal with it".  
    • Thanks so much. Yes I have. Really appreciate your kindness in replying. Thank you.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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