What is considered a small fetus?

At 31 weeks, I had an ultrasound and the sono tech said the baby is a bit
small for 31 weeks. He said only a week off or that it measured 30 weeks.
What does this mean?

Also maybe my baby was smaller all along and will turn out to be 6 or 7 lbs
at birth, but is this different than the gal who has a 6 or 7 lber as
opposed to somebody who had an 8 lber? Does this mean the lower birth
weight babies were small for dates the entire pregnancy or just slower
weight gain during the last few weeks.

Thanks for your advice again

Ollie wrote:

At 31 weeks, I had an ultrasound and the sono tech said the baby is a bit
small for 31 weeks. He said only a week off or that it measured 30 weeks.
What does this mean?

IMHO, nothing. My baby was measuring small at 24 weeks (I
think maybe a week behind). She was 95th percentile for
length and 75th percentile for weight at birth. Even
corrected for gestation (she was born at 41w2d), she was
55th percentile for weight.

Phoebe
--
yahoo address is unread - substitute mailbolt

If the baby is only one-week-off for size according to the ultrasound charts
at this stage, I wouldn't worry a bit about it. Babies vary a lot in size
by this point. Also, ultrasound can be quite wrong in its weight/size
estimates by the third trimester. (People on this ng often post stories of
babies being a half to a full pound larger or smaller than scan estimates
suggested they would be, which is a HUGE difference!)

Erin, edd 10/27


"Ollie" wrote in message
t...
At 31 weeks, I had an ultrasound and the sono tech said the baby is a bit
small for 31 weeks. He said only a week off or that it measured 30 weeks.
What does this mean?

Also maybe my baby was smaller all along and will turn out to be 6 or 7
lbs
at birth, but is this different than the gal who has a 6 or 7 lber as
opposed to somebody who had an 8 lber? Does this mean the lower birth
weight babies were small for dates the entire pregnancy or just slower
weight gain during the last few weeks.

Thanks for your advice again

Phoebe & Allyson wibbled

Ollie wrote:

At 31 weeks, I had an ultrasound and the sono tech said the baby
is a bit small for 31 weeks. He said only a week off or that it
measured 30 weeks. What does this mean?

IMHO, nothing. My baby was measuring small at 24 weeks (I
think maybe a week behind). She was 95th percentile for
length and 75th percentile for weight at birth. Even
corrected for gestation (she was born at 41w2d), she was
55th percentile for weight.

Similarly, my Small Clanger was at least a week behind at 20 weeks, and
we were worried about him because his measurements were out of
proportion too. He was born at 41w3d, 7lb11oz, perfectly in proportion,
and although he was considered to be 25th centile then (adjusted), he's
now 90th plus at 12 weeks. We don't think he'll be tall (both parents
are 5ft6) but he's certainly not small.

Jac

Jacqui wibbled

Phoebe & Allyson wibbled

Ollie wrote:

At 31 weeks, I had an ultrasound and the sono tech said the baby
is a bit small for 31 weeks. He said only a week off or that it
measured 30 weeks. What does this mean?

IMHO, nothing. My baby was measuring small at 24 weeks (I
think maybe a week behind). She was 95th percentile for
length and 75th percentile for weight at birth. Even
corrected for gestation (she was born at 41w2d), she was
55th percentile for weight.

Similarly, my Small Clanger was at least a week behind at 20
weeks, and we were worried about him because his measurements were
out of proportion too. He was born at 41w3d, 7lb11oz, perfectly in
proportion, and although he was considered to be 25th centile then
(adjusted), he's now 90th plus at 12 weeks. We don't think he'll
be tall (both parents are 5ft6) but he's certainly not small.

Oh, and IIRC once you get past 20 weeks or so there's much more
'normal' variation in such measurements, so "small for 31 weeks" means
a lot less than "small for 11 weeks" would. Heck, my mum's "small for
5x years" if you want to take it that far ;-)

Jac (large for 31 years...)

At 31 weeks, I had an ultrasound and the sono tech said the baby is a bit
small for 31 weeks. He said only a week off or that it measured 30 weeks.
What does this mean?

Also maybe my baby was smaller all along and will turn out to be 6 or 7 lbs
at birth, but is this different than the gal who has a 6 or 7 lber as
opposed to somebody who had an 8 lber? Does this mean the lower birth
weight babies were small for dates the entire pregnancy or just slower
weight gain during the last few weeks.

1 week behind probably is around 25th percentile or higher, making it a 6
or 7 pounder. At 31 weeks I had an ultrasound which put me 2 weeks ahead
size wise, I was a bit worried as I'm not big, then he almost stopped
growing various admin things and the fact outpatients clinc was on a
monday and there were two bank holidays in may meant I only had one more
appointment and no further scans, then we were told the baby would be
small, which at first relieved me as I didn't want to give birth to a 9
pounder, I thought a 6 pounder would suit my hips far better, then they
said 5 pounds something, that freaked me. I did some research, under 5lb
9oz in considered "low birth weight" and under 5lb "very low birth
weight", there are potential problems assosiated with this, but they are
not universal. He popped out at 5lb 13oz, so small but not too small,
thankfully.

At 31 weeks, I had an ultrasound and the sono tech said the baby is a bit
small for 31 weeks. He said only a week off or that it measured 30 weeks.
What does this mean?

I don't know why on earth they use those "weeks" estimates. They make no sense.
What he meant was that whatever measurement he was talking about was 50th
percentile for a 30-weeker. That doesn't really tell you at all how low it is
for a 31-weeker. It's like saying that your ten-year-old is the height of an
average nine-year-old. Unless you know how much kids typically change in height
at that age, you have no idea if that is a big difference or not. It would make
a whole lot more sense to say whether your child is 25th percentile for
nine-year-olds, or 10th, or 45th, or what.

My favorite was the estimate that said one of my daughters had a 37-week head
and 42-week thighbones, or something like that. Made it sound as though she was
a peabrain. Actually she was a 36.5-weeker with a normal head and long legs.
Not a blessed thing wrong with that!

--Helen

On 23 Oct 2003 21:36:27 GMT, (H Schinske) wrote:

My favorite was the estimate that said one of my daughters had a 37-week head
and 42-week thighbones, or something like that. Made it sound as though she was
a peabrain. Actually she was a 36.5-weeker with a normal head and long legs.
Not a blessed thing wrong with that!

My favourite was when I had a late ultrasound with #2 and the
estimates were all estimated due dates based on the size. According
to the ultrasound #2's head was due around the 15th Oct, his stomach
was due around Oct 22 and his legs weren't due until Nov 4.

As it turns out he does have short legs in proportion to his body but
I think that's something he's inherited from his paternal grandmother.


--
Cheryl
Mum to DS#1 (11 Mar 99), DS#2 (4 Oct 00)
and DD (30 Jul 02)

Cheryl ) wrote:


My favourite was when I had a late
ultrasound with #2 and the
estimates were all estimated due dates based on the size. According
to the ultrasound #2's head was due around the 15th Oct, his stomach
was due around Oct 22 and his legs weren't due until Nov 4.

I don't even want to THINK about that labor!!! LOL!

--Helen