Printable View
Hi
my dd was born weighing 9lb 3 oz (4.16kg)
Everyone comments how big that is for my first baby and that I will have bigger babies if I have more.
is this quite likely? is that the general pattern?
I had a 3rd degree tear and 3 hour pushing stage, I'm hoping I don't have a 10 pounder next time!! ;)
also, is it common to get a 3rd degree tear again? the physio at the hospital said due to me having a big baby and a 3rd degree tear, I should maybe think about a cesarean next time!
thanks
It a question that has no answer really. Some women have bigger babies each time and other don't. Some women have all their babies that are roughly the same weight, sometimes if the next is a boy it could be bigger, but if your next is a girl they could be smaller. If you go early or go late that can affect bubs size. So see how you can't answer? There are too many variables. My first was a smidge bigger than yours and my next was a girl who was smaller, but my next two were significantly bigger each time.
And I think your physio is talking out their arse quite frankly. There could have been a lot of reasons why you were pushing for long and tore as bad as you did and not many of those reasons would have anything to do with the size of your baby.
My first, DS weighed 9lb 3oz. My second, DD weighed 9lb 1oz. So they don't always get bigger. I had a long hard labour the first time, ended up having a episiotomy as I needed help getting him out. The second time was a breeze. I did get a second degree tear but the pushing stage was 13 minutes compared to ages with DS (don't know how long but too long).
DS was 8 pound. 2.5 oz
DD1 was 8 pound 11.5oz
DD2 was 8 pound 10 oz.
DS1 was 7lb 2oz
DS2 was 8b 2oz
Can I just say I was in your position while PG with DS. The Drs were pushing me for a CS for the same reasons (DD was 8lb 13oz) they said subsequent babies are usually bigger & boys are generally bigger than girls (my second was a boy). I also had a 3rd degree tear with DD.
I chose another vag birth. DS was born at 39+2weeks PG & only weighed 7lb 3oz & I only tore a tiny amount. (DD was 41+1weeks)
Thats just my experience. FWIW I will always choose Vag over cs in the future. If I need an emergency cs then such is life, but I'll try vag first.
Good luck with your pending birth
For me it has definitely not been true.
Here are my children's birth weights;
DS1 - 9lb 7oz
DD1 - 7lb 9oz
DS2 - 7lb 10oz
DD2 - 8lb 13oz
my first born ds was 10lbs3oz and then my second ds was 8lbs4oz...so they don't necessarily get bigger, despite everyone telling me to expect a 12pounder second time around!
1st- DS was 8lbs14.5oz 2 tears- 1st degree in my urethra and 2nd degree along my perenium.
2nd - DD was 7lbs12oz - no tearing.
1. 9lb 2 oz
2. 8lb 9 oz
3. 8lb 4 oz
4. 7lb 7 oz
All of mine have been around the same.
#1 9lb 7oz
#2 9lb
#3 9lb 2oz
DS was 8lb 7oz
DD was 9lb 6.5oz
My obstetrician certainly subscribes to the theory that babies get bigger with each pregnancy, and has already told me it would be advisable to watch my diet and to make sure I get tested for gestational diabetes this time around...even though I ate well in my previous pregnancies and have never had gestational diabetes.
However...with regard to the actual birth, I had a second degree tear and a forceps birth with DS but DD, who was a whole pound bigger, was a completely natural drug-free birth, much faster labour and I only needed 3 tiny little stitches. A much easier birth.
Instead of scaring you with the thought of a bigger baby, people should be telling you how much easier labour should be next time around!!!!
It definitely doesn't sound like it necessarily happens. Each of mine got bigger though.
DS1 - 8lb 3oz
DS2 - 8lb 13oz
DD - 9lb 5oz
But it honestly made no difference or made things worse the bigger each baby got. DD was a much quicker labour than her brothers were and I only had a tiny tear.
DD1 - 41+1 - 7lb 5oz
DD2 - 41 - 8lb 9oz
DS - 39+2 - 8lb 7.5oz
There was a whole 45 grams between DD2 & DS. He was a bigger baby in length & HC, but she was chubbier, lol. Had they all been born around the same they probably would've gone smaller to bigger.
With their births, position made a difference. DD1 had pretty basic labour. DD2 was longer coz she was head down, but sideways. DS was quicker. I had grazes with DD1, 1st degree with DD2 & no tears at all with DS as (I put it down to this) they said to stop pushing as he was crowning. Slowed his head down a bit iykwim. I didn't have stitches with any of them.
thanks for the replies everyone :)
its good to see that babies don't always get bigger! (but I don't mind anyway ;) as long as they are healthy)
I found the contractions not too bad at all, the pain, but I hated the pushing stage (I only had gas and air for an hour, but the midwife took it off me before the pushing stage as it was making me sleepy!)
thanks again
DD1 - 8lb 10 - grazed
DS1 - 9lb 13 - no tearing or grazing
DS2 - 8lb 12
DD2 - 10lb 8 - tear
FWIW - I put the tearing with DD2 down to my birth position - I was on my back - NOT where I wanted to be but I was on my back for other reasons & then it all happened very quickly.
I suspect if it had been done differently I wouldn't have torn as badly.
Jen you will more than likely find that the pushing stage with this baby is a lot quicker and easier than your first one. I went from a 1.5hr second stage with my first bub down to about 15 minutes with my second and she crowned while I was on the toilet. It only took as long as it did to get her out because I didn't push, I breathed her out to slow it down a bit. Even with my last two being much bigger (4.32 and 4.56) they both 1/2hr to get out and only then it was that long because they were both posterior and DS2 got stuck. Otherwise their second stages would have been a lot quicker too.
The first baby kinda 'paves the way' for any subsequent babies to come out. Plus this time you have the benefit of having been there, done that, before so you will know what works better for you and also it may be easier to focus on getting them out. The first time around you are a bit clueless with that kind of thing and it can be harder to know what to do kwim?
I don't really agree with this myth..
DS1 8lb 13oz
DS2 9lb 14oz
DS3 8lb 9oz
DD1 6lb 12oz
My MIL had the opposite.. Her kids got smaller each time :lol:
I am wondering the same thing. My DS was 9 pound 1oz born at 39+2 and I had a slight tear. I am due with another boy in 6 weeks and am curious to see what he will weigh! :)
I completely forgot to answer your question about tearing! Again, it really depends. I had an episiotomy with my first because I really wasn't going to get his head out without tearing and they cut me to prevent me tearing in a 'bad' place (but tell me where is a GOOD place to tear on your vagina ROFL) and the moulding on his head was amazing - he looked like a conehead :rofl: He only had a 34.8 hc. My next two only had a 34cm hc and I had 2nd deg tears with them. My third being a posterior birth meant that she did get a bit stuck too. I only had a small graze that required no stitches with my 4th baby and he had a 37cm hc, plus the shoulder dystocia meant that the Dr had to manouver his shoulders out but putting his hand in as well so I was bloody impressed that I only had a graze. All 4 times I gave bith in a semi reclined position. If you have great perennial support during the second stage as well as be in a position conducive to not tearing (on all 4s etc) then chances are that you wont tear at all, or if you do it will only be minimal.
*points to weights in my signature*
I've never met anyone whose babies just kept getting bigger and bigger.
On the tear. I only had a tiny 1cm long/deep tear with my first - then I never tore again. In fact, my near 10 pounder was the easiest labour I remember. Miss L was the hardest/longest and Miss P easily blitzed them all as most painful.
Well I'm gonna stick my stats in ;)
DS1 6lb 7oz (2920g) - graze
DD 6lb 3.5oz (2820g) - nothing
DS2 6lb 11oz (3033g) - nothing
:D
My babies got bigger. DD was 3850gm (8lb 8oz), 36cm HC and 50cm long and DS was 4400gm (9lb 11oz) 37cm HC and 54cm long. So mine got bigger in every way, LOL!!
DD1 was 7lb10oz
DD2 was 7lb2oz
I had an epi and 2nd degree tear with DD1 and a 2nd degree tear only with DD2 but I healed much much faster the second time around though. Don't know if that's a lot of help, but good luck anyway.
I had:
DD: 7lb 13oz
DS 1: 9lb 5oz
DS 2: 9lb 9.5oz
so mine have definitely gone up in weight, but as for tears/stitches etc, they got easier each time and did less damage, and #3 was a massively easier birth compared to the first two, and he was the biggest. Just because they're heavy doesn't mean they're 'big' or chubby, either - all three of mine were really skinny little things, but just really long.
agree with this.:
mine were:
DD - 3.5kg - 3rd degree tearing.
DS1 - 3.6kg - slight graze no tearing.
DS2 - 4.3kg - nothing in regards to tearing at all.
Thanks so much everyone, its really reasurring to read your replies!. I quite enjoyed the active stage of labour, I dialated very quickly (think I was 6cm when I got to the hospital) and found it not too bad at all, its the 3 hours of pushing I didn't like... very painful, as though dd was totally stuck and never going to come. her head was 36cm and she was chubby. the midwife said ''oohh wow look how chubby she is. she has rolls of fat on her arms and legs'' haha. Its great to hear that next time around the pushing stage may be reduced dramatically! yay!