DD2 was an IUGR baby, it was picked up at the 20 week ultrasound - up until then she had been very average size wise and was then suddenly small - and I had ultrasounds every 4 weeks until I was induced. With DD2 all the measurements (I think there was about 8?) were consistently small every scan - so knew she was still growing evenly but was small, below 3rd %ile. I think with growth concerns you need to look at the comparison over a few weeks or months to see how they are tracking rather than just looking at one set of measurements. So the tummy measurement could be small now, but if it continues to track along the same %ile all the time it may not be a concern, just a baby with a skinny belly Anyway because DD2 was growing consistently I wasn't induced until my due date and she was a tiny 5lb 9oz. It seemed obvious that she wasn't growing very well in utero because she was sooooo much smaller than her older sister and she was very very very hungry when she was born. That caused us a few issues in the early days of BFing but nothing the midwives who had experience with tiny hungry babies couldn't help me with.

I don't know if there was a specific time that she was called IUGR, I think over the course of multiple scans we knew that something was up but because growth was steady and consistent my ob let it go and the IUGR label was only really applied when it came to taking some action - induction. But DD2s IUGR was pretty mild (obviously as she got to her due date), I imagine a more severe case would have that label applied much earlier?

Good luck with the next scan.