Um no, 20 weeks I personally think is way too early to determine the size of bubz!
One of my friends who only has 5 weeks to go is FREAKING herself out because she thinks she's going to have a HUUUGE baby. The Dr said she can expect a baby between 7-9lb (ummm thats a HUUUUGE gap!!!) but she also thinks if she has a small baby it will be less painful .. I shouldnt laugh but she makes me laugh (we've known each other for almost 20 years so i CAN laugh at her!)
I was told to expect a 8 1/2 pounder and she ended up being 9.1 I had an awesome 4 hr labour with my DD!
My scans estimated bubs weight and size at each scan but not in advance. Scans can be out by 2lb as well, so I wouldnt go panicking just yet. A 9lb bubba also doesnt mean you are gonna be torn to no end, much smaller babies can do that and much larger ones may not. My DD was no where near 9lb and I had everytjing but a 4th degree tear. A huge variation of things cause tearing. Dont worry too much about it, hun
I was told at my 20 week scan with DS1 that he was well above 'normal' 20 week size and he would be well over 10lb by 40 weeks. In the end he was 6lb 15oz at 38 weeks. I did have PE though, which probably reduced his growth towards the end. DS2 was big at his 20 weeks scan too, but was only 7lb 8oz at 40 weeks.
I wouldn't worry at this point. My ob told me after I was told I would be having a giant baby that he hears that all the time and it is rarely the case. The estimates are based on length of bones at 20 weeks, so could just be saying you will have a really tall baby, not necessarily fat or with a giant head (the bit you really need to worry about ).
No prediction of weight, but at my 20 week scan I was told that this ones head size was 95 percentile but not out of proportion with the rest of him, so guess that means is big all over. I am expecting a big bub with big head, based on DD and the fact DH and I both have big heads, and my fundal height measurements, but I want a big baby little ones scare me, and with the birth what will be will be am sure if he is in the right position all will be fine. Everything I have read suggests is position rather than size that has more impact (DD forehead posterior presentation leading to e-csection) and so a big baby in a good position can give a better outcome than a smaller baby in a bad position. I am sure I was also told that big heads can be a good thing, something to do with the pressure of the head on the cervix causing efficient dilation or something. I would also be very surprised if all babies grow at a uniform rate over the last 20 weeks (which they would need to give an accurate prediction of size) would think is like people varying rates of growth depending on genetics and other things.
I had constant monitoring of DD's size due to the fact that she was going to be delivered prematurely.
She was measured at an estimated size of 2lb 10oz at 33+5weeks.
She was born at 4 days later at 3lb 12oz.
And she hadn't grown in 2 weeks, so they're not very accurate..
Yes, baby was estimated to be about average size at 20 and 34 week scans. Nobody made any big deal about size or weight or anything, just that she was right on average.
She was a 9 pounder (a couple of grams short, but close to 9lbs) and I had really minor tearing. There was debate as to whether it was first degree or grazing. So big doesn't mean tearing.
with my daughter they told me at my 20 and 34 week scan she was going to be much bigger then my first (he was born 8.11lbs) but she came out 8.6lbs
when i was in labour with my son they predicted he would be between 7-8lbs but he was a little bigger lol my OB was very shocked
but this bubs is measuring smaller then my first 2 so ill be intertested to see how big he comes out his currently in the 14-20%weight/size range at my 32week U/S
Registered User
.. I shouldnt laugh but she makes me laugh (we've known each other for almost 20 years so i CAN laugh at her!)
I had an awesome 4 hr labour with my DD!
).
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks