Big baby at 34 weeks gestation!! | ExpatWoman.com
 

Big baby at 34 weeks gestation!!

184
Posts
EW NEWBIE
Latest post on 27 October 2013 - 11:56

So for the last month everytime I''ve gone to my doc for a checkup I would be told baby is too big (2 weeks ahead) based on measurement of head circumference and his tummy?
I am 34 weeks pregnant now and went for a check up to be told baby is already 3.2 kilos!!!!! And his head is quite low (which I already knew as I have been having aches down there and am basically in the toilet every other minute or so it feels very very low lol)
When Doc saw that baby is actually 37 weeks (as per head measurements) he said he might come early considering how low he is and also because he is quite big there is a chance I might be induced at 38 weeks.. as you can imagine this is not what I wanted to hear.. and obviously the idea of being introduced or a c section is not what I would like..
So I guess my question is:
1. How accurate are these measurements at this point, is he really that big?? I mean 3.2 kilos at 34 weeks is a bit ridiculous.. I have gained around 12 kilos so far and dont look very big!
2. Doc said I need to cut carbs from my diet now so I will do this of course, but will this actually control the situation?
3. I guess I just want to hear this is okay and it happens always and no big deal :D

Thank you in advance ladies!

x

391
Posts
EW EXPLORER
Latest post on 28 October 2013 - 17:57
I was very big with my first pregnancy. Nothing ever untoward though. DS arrived and weighed only 2kg! With my second I was no where near as big. He weighed 2.8kg.
326
Posts
EW EXPLORER
Latest post on 28 October 2013 - 13:41
I was huge when I was pregnant. I had scans every week for 15 weeks to make sure I was only carrying one baby. Then they tolf me my baby was over 3kg at 30 weeks. My baby was born on her due date, 40 weeks exactly weighing 3.21KG they get the weight so wrong sometimes, its best guess IMO Same! I was huge. Everyone asked if it was twins. He was measuring 4 weeks ahead. Drs said he was a big boy. Born 10 days late, weighing in at a whopping (drum roll, please) 3.5kg! DD was the smallest and most painful. Bring on the big bubs! Big really is better! <em>edited by EmmaRitz on 28/10/2013</em>
184
Posts
EW NEWBIE
Latest post on 28 October 2013 - 13:30
Thank you ladies! So good to hear your stories, feel MUCH better now :D :D :D I've also heard that about big babies, namely from my ma! She swears by saying that its a blessing if your baby is big because then you wont have any problems- fingers crossed :D xxx
339
Posts
EW EXPLORER
Latest post on 28 October 2013 - 12:10
I was huge when I was pregnant. I had scans every week for 15 weeks to make sure I was only carrying one baby. Then they tolf me my baby was over 3kg at 30 weeks. My baby was born on her due date, 40 weeks exactly weighing 3.21KG they get the weight so wrong sometimes, its best guess IMO
45
Posts
EW NEWBIE
Latest post on 28 October 2013 - 11:55
2dogs, My babies were all big 4.1, 4.2 & finally 4.8 kg. All went full term and were extremely healthy. I've heard (don't know if it's true) the bigger they are the healthier they'll be. And it's been true since, they've all been extremely healthy (they're now between 7 & 11). I would let things go naturally as long as you can. They just seem to know when it's the right time for them. ;0) Good Luck with everything.
184
Posts
EW NEWBIE
Latest post on 28 October 2013 - 11:31
So is it possible that we have my due date wrong by the scan? or does the scan due date trump last period dates.. and is this me just trying to find reasons why the scan said my baby was 3 weeks ahead haha The first scan's estimate of gestational age is going to be the most accurate. Their development is very predictable during the first trimester and measurements are generally really accurate. 2nd and 3rd trimester estimates of size are frequently off because babies grow at different rates at that point and accurate measurements are more difficult to get. Thank you Meagle, I was scanned at 6 weeks I thinks so it should be pretty accurate! :)
849
Posts
EW GURU
Latest post on 28 October 2013 - 11:29
So is it possible that we have my due date wrong by the scan? or does the scan due date trump last period dates.. and is this me just trying to find reasons why the scan said my baby was 3 weeks ahead haha The first scan's estimate of gestational age is going to be the most accurate. Their development is very predictable during the first trimester and measurements are generally really accurate. 2nd and 3rd trimester estimates of size are frequently off because babies grow at different rates at that point and accurate measurements are more difficult to get.
184
Posts
EW NEWBIE
Latest post on 28 October 2013 - 11:26
So was having a think last night and realised the following: 1. The first day of my last period was Feb 13th- based on that my due date would be Nov 20 and I am actually 36 weeks. 2. When I went to the docs at first, my due date was recalculated to Dec 4th and hasnt really changed since based on babies size etc and that makes me 34 weeks now. The reason for the discrepancy at the time we thought was because I have PCOS which means that I never actually know when I ovulate. So is it possible that we have my due date wrong by the scan? or does the scan due date trump last period dates.. and is this me just trying to find reasons why the scan said my baby was 3 weeks ahead haha
184
Posts
EW NEWBIE
Latest post on 27 October 2013 - 13:38
Oh thank you ladies! Well to be fair to the doc, he is really pro natural and has said all these things IF the baby continues to grow so big. I personally will also opt for a natural for sure and would love to make it to 40 weeks.. so fingers crossed. Good to know the measurements arent 100% and that chances of a natural delivery at 40 weeks is still a possibility :) xx
1370
Posts
EW OLDHAND
Latest post on 27 October 2013 - 13:09
A lot of it depends on head size rather than birth weight. Both mine were 4.1kgs but my youngest was sooooo easy..one push and popped out. Her head was tiny compared to her sister's.
215
Posts
EW NEWBIE
Latest post on 27 October 2013 - 13:04
My DD was around 2 kg at 32 weeks and was 3.4 kg at birth. I was induced at 40 weeks because the doc said shes big for my pelvis and unfortunately in a posterior position with a floating head. Though I knew the chances for vaginal delivery was v less, I asked the doc to try her best which is why she induced me. But it was a failure. I went through 6-7 hours of pain with no progress leading to C-Section finally. I do think your baby is a little big but yeah scans are not v accurate to my knowledge and I dont think you should let her induce you unless and until you are sure it wont end up like mine.
849
Posts
EW GURU
Latest post on 27 October 2013 - 12:42
Also, remember baby's heads aren't fused. They are meant to move a bit to fit through your pelvis. Have you ever seen a newborn born with a cone for a head? Yup, it happens. Fat squishes.
326
Posts
EW EXPLORER
Latest post on 27 October 2013 - 12:37
It's okay and does happen. My nephew weighed 4.5 kilos. Born naturally on due date. The bigger they are, the easier they come out. I would let it be. Unless the Drs fear medical safety, I wouldn't have a voluntary c-sec. I was advised throughout my last pregnancy by about 4 Drs to have a csec, but then 1 refused, saying if it came to that it'd happen but she would not refer me to make a voluntary appointment. Well, from the first pain to bubba introducing himself was about an hour. Drs do prefer to be cautious and do consider your comfort. But if you can stick it out until at least 38 weeks, then I would. :)
4062
Posts
EW MASTER
Latest post on 27 October 2013 - 12:23
As Meagle said, the measurements often aren't accurate at your stage. Are you sure of your conception date? I'm always about a week further along than by normal dates as I ovulate early. I would't get induced at 38 weeks without a second opinion or if it was for an absolute reason. I know a couple of ladies here who have been induced due to a 'big' baby who turned out to be not so big.
849
Posts
EW GURU
Latest post on 27 October 2013 - 12:17
I would suggest that you do some of your own reading and research. My SIL was facing a similar situation. 3rd trimester ultrasounds are not very accurate for determining size and weight at birth. They can be off 1 kg in either direction or more. Not sure where your doc received his training, but the American Academy of OB/GYNs [u'>DOES NOT[/u'> recommend an automatic c-section or an early induction for a suspected big baby.[url=http://www.aafp.org/afp/2001/0701/p169.html '>link[/url'>Unless you have untreated gestation diabetes the chances that your body will make a baby bigger than you can deliver naturally are pretty slim. SIL had her baby over the weekend: 3.6kg. <em>edited by Meagle on 27/10/2013</em>
 
 

ON EXPATWOMAN TODAY