A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » misc.kids » Pregnancy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Baby size/difficulty of delivery



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 13th 04, 01:14 AM
Emily
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Baby size/difficulty of delivery

Hi folks,

I was just reading the thread from last week about u/s
predicting weight (and how inaccurate they are), and I wanted
to ask a question. I'd been under the impression that the
baby's weight isn't really a huge factor in how hard or easy
the delivery is. My doula for #1 said that the later one goes
the less a baby's head can mold, and so the harder it is to
fit. That seemed to make sense to me (#1 was born at 39 weeks,
and things went pretty well). But it would also seem to imply
that weight is only a correlate and not a cause of more difficult
deliveries, since later babies tend to weigh more, too.

In sum, the hardest part is getting the head out, and heavier
babies don't necessarily have bigger heads, just more fat
on them, right?

(In my one experience, the actual pushing wasn't the hard part
at all, but rather all the rest of labor getting the cervix
open enough. But I understand that YMMV, and I was blessed with
a short pushing stage.)

Emily
mom to Toby 5/1/02
#2 EDD 7/19/04
  #2  
Old February 13th 04, 05:25 AM
Ericka Kammerer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Baby size/difficulty of delivery

Emily wrote:

Hi folks,

I was just reading the thread from last week about u/s
predicting weight (and how inaccurate they are), and I wanted
to ask a question. I'd been under the impression that the
baby's weight isn't really a huge factor in how hard or easy
the delivery is. My doula for #1 said that the later one goes
the less a baby's head can mold, and so the harder it is to
fit. That seemed to make sense to me (#1 was born at 39 weeks,
and things went pretty well). But it would also seem to imply
that weight is only a correlate and not a cause of more difficult
deliveries, since later babies tend to weigh more, too.

In sum, the hardest part is getting the head out, and heavier
babies don't necessarily have bigger heads, just more fat
on them, right?



And fat squishes ;-) Frankly, while studies
do suggest that macrosomic babies have a higher incidence
of shoulder dystocia, I always take that with a grain of
salt. Position makes a huge difference--probably even
more so than size. And really, I had one baby who was
both big *and* big-headed, and he was no trouble to
push out either. That's not to say some women don't
have a hard time with larger babies, but I think it's
far from a given.


(In my one experience, the actual pushing wasn't the hard part
at all, but rather all the rest of labor getting the cervix
open enough. But I understand that YMMV, and I was blessed with
a short pushing stage.)



Same happened for me--for the smaller headed babies
as well as the large headed baby.

Best wishes,
Ericka

  #3  
Old February 13th 04, 01:29 PM
Mary Gordon
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Baby size/difficulty of delivery

My biggest baby was 10 lb 4 ounces, but she had the smallest head of
my three, so there you go. And for pities sake, an extra week or two
in the womb isn't going to make their heads like concrete. Their heads
are made to squish, but also to grow. If they couldn't do the
squishing, the plates would have fused, and then they would be in
major big trouble for a whole other set of problems related to brain
and head expansion later.

Position is everything - both baby and mother. It is very important
for larger babies that mom can be mobile. I think a lot of babies get
"stuck" due to mom being pretty much immobilized by tubes and gadgets,
and drugs, sitting on her rear end with her knees in the air - the
worst possible position for larger babies.


Mary G.
  #4  
Old February 13th 04, 03:37 PM
Ilse Witch
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Baby size/difficulty of delivery

On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 00:14:40 +0000, Emily wrote:

In sum, the hardest part is getting the head out, and heavier
babies don't necessarily have bigger heads, just more fat
on them, right?


Babies are quite different, e.g. DS had a relatively big head, but weighed
the average 8lb. Getting the head out was indeed hard, I didn't manage
without having a cut, but didn't suffer from that at all afterwards. In
general what I read here is that the heavier babies are actually easier to
deliver.

--
-- I
mommy to DS (19m)
mommy to a tiny angel (Oct 2003)
EDD October 1
guardian of DH (33)
War doesn't decide who's right, only who's left

  #5  
Old February 13th 04, 04:34 PM
Jody Pellerin
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Baby size/difficulty of delivery

This thread makes me feel better. I think this baby is going to be really
big and I'm kind of scared of that. The father, Matt was 5 pounds and
something and he was born at 7-7.5 months gestation. He would have been huge
at full term I think! He's also quite big now. I on the other hand was 6lbs
and half an ounce when I was born. Anyways the ultrasound showed the baby is
right now 12 inches long. Two inches bigger then average from everywhere I
read. o_O If it keeps up the growth, it's going to be huge.
"Joybelle" wrote in message
...

"Emily" wrote in message
news:QFUWb.165761$U%5.738908@attbi_s03...
Hi folks,

I was just reading the thread from last week about u/s
predicting weight (and how inaccurate they are), and I wanted
to ask a question. I'd been under the impression that the
baby's weight isn't really a huge factor in how hard or easy
the delivery is. My doula for #1 said that the later one goes
the less a baby's head can mold, and so the harder it is to
fit. That seemed to make sense to me (#1 was born at 39 weeks,
and things went pretty well). But it would also seem to imply
that weight is only a correlate and not a cause of more difficult
deliveries, since later babies tend to weigh more, too.

In sum, the hardest part is getting the head out, and heavier
babies don't necessarily have bigger heads, just more fat
on them, right?



Well, for me, the 8 lb 3 oz baby was tougher to push out than the 10 lb 3 oz
baby. They were the same gestational age at a little over 41 weeks. People
are positively shocked when they hear I had a 10-pounder at home, and so far
it has been no use explaining that it wasn't much different from the
8-pounder, and maybe even a little easier.



(In my one experience, the actual pushing wasn't the hard part
at all, but rather all the rest of labor getting the cervix
open enough. But I understand that YMMV, and I was blessed with
a short pushing stage.)



With my first baby, I had an epidural, and pushing ended up being a breeze.
My second and third were born at home, and the pushing stage was so very,
very difficult. I had to push against a cervical lip both times, though.

Joy

Rose 1/99
Iris 2/01
Spencer 3/03



  #6  
Old February 13th 04, 05:06 PM
Circe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Baby size/difficulty of delivery

Jody Pellerin wrote:
This thread makes me feel better. I think this baby is going to be
really big and I'm kind of scared of that. The father, Matt was 5
pounds and something and he was born at 7-7.5 months gestation.
He would have been huge at full term I think! He's also quite big now.
I on the other hand was 6lbs and half an ounce when I was born.


As a general rule, babies' birthweight is controlled by maternal factors.
This means that the mother's *own* birthweight is more likely to be
predictive of her baby's birthweight than the father's birthweight.

Also, birthweight isn't very predictive of future size. All of my babies
were around the 50th percentile for weight and height at birth. The boys put
on weight and height very quickly immediately after birth, and both hover at
the top of the charts now. My daughter, by comparison, grew at a much more
standard rate and is now around the 40th percentile for weight and height.

IOW, *your* body is more likely to be controlling the size of your baby at
birth than genetic factors like future size or your husband's birthweight.
Generally speaking, your body won't let you grow a baby bigger than you can
birth. Naturally, there are exceptions to this rule, but by and large, it's
true. So even if your baby is bigger than average, it's pretty likely that
he/she won't be bigger than you can birth.
--
Be well, Barbara
(Julian [6], Aurora [4], and Vernon's [23 mos.] mom)

This week's special at the English Language Butcher Shop:
Financing for "5" years -- car dealership sign

Mommy: I call you "baby" because I love you.
Julian (age 4): Oh! All right, Mommy baby.

All opinions expressed in this post are well-reasoned and insightful.
Needless to say, they are not those of my Internet Service Provider, its
other subscribers or lackeys. Anyone who says otherwise is itchin' for a
fight. -- with apologies to Michael Feldman


  #7  
Old February 13th 04, 05:18 PM
Vicky Bilaniuk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Baby size/difficulty of delivery

Circe wrote:

Jody Pellerin wrote:

This thread makes me feel better. I think this baby is going to be
really big and I'm kind of scared of that. The father, Matt was 5
pounds and something and he was born at 7-7.5 months gestation.
He would have been huge at full term I think! He's also quite big now.
I on the other hand was 6lbs and half an ounce when I was born.



As a general rule, babies' birthweight is controlled by maternal factors.
This means that the mother's *own* birthweight is more likely to be
predictive of her baby's birthweight than the father's birthweight.

Also, birthweight isn't very predictive of future size. All of my babies
were around the 50th percentile for weight and height at birth. The boys put
on weight and height very quickly immediately after birth, and both hover at
the top of the charts now. My daughter, by comparison, grew at a much more
standard rate and is now around the 40th percentile for weight and height.

IOW, *your* body is more likely to be controlling the size of your baby at
birth than genetic factors like future size or your husband's birthweight.
Generally speaking, your body won't let you grow a baby bigger than you can
birth. Naturally, there are exceptions to this rule, but by and large, it's
true. So even if your baby is bigger than average, it's pretty likely that
he/she won't be bigger than you can birth.


This reminds me of a theory I learned about a couple of years ago. It
comes from evolutionary biology. It states, essentially, that babies
are always trying to grow as big as they can get, and the mothers are
always fighting it. There was a bit more to it than this, but this was
the basic idea. It was pretty interesting.

  #8  
Old February 13th 04, 05:18 PM
Carla
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Baby size/difficulty of delivery

Sorry to branch this post out into another one but after reading all
of the stuff about the mother's birthweight being a factor, I got
really scared. I was a really big baby (almost 10 lbs!) but I was
carried 30 days past my due date (in 1972). My OB assures me that no
one would be allowed to go that long today.

So to me, I would have been relatively normal size had I not been a
month old! Does that seem right or am I destined to have a 10 lb baby
even if I deliver before or on my due date?

yikes!
  #9  
Old February 13th 04, 05:24 PM
Anne Rogers
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Baby size/difficulty of delivery

Sorry to branch this post out into another one but after reading all
of the stuff about the mother's birthweight being a factor, I got
really scared. I was a really big baby (almost 10 lbs!) but I was
carried 30 days past my due date (in 1972). My OB assures me that no
one would be allowed to go that long today.

So to me, I would have been relatively normal size had I not been a
month old! Does that seem right or am I destined to have a 10 lb baby
even if I deliver before or on my due date?


there is a possibility the due date was wrong, drs tend to insist that the
due date is 40 weeks after LMP regardless of cycle length. There seems to
be a correlation between the babies birth weight and the birth weight of
the parents, but it's still very unpredictable, our baby was 2lb less than
either of us were at birth

  #10  
Old February 13th 04, 06:17 PM
Joybelle
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Baby size/difficulty of delivery


"Emily" wrote in message
news:QFUWb.165761$U%5.738908@attbi_s03...
Hi folks,

I was just reading the thread from last week about u/s
predicting weight (and how inaccurate they are), and I wanted
to ask a question. I'd been under the impression that the
baby's weight isn't really a huge factor in how hard or easy
the delivery is. My doula for #1 said that the later one goes
the less a baby's head can mold, and so the harder it is to
fit. That seemed to make sense to me (#1 was born at 39 weeks,
and things went pretty well). But it would also seem to imply
that weight is only a correlate and not a cause of more difficult
deliveries, since later babies tend to weigh more, too.

In sum, the hardest part is getting the head out, and heavier
babies don't necessarily have bigger heads, just more fat
on them, right?



Well, for me, the 8 lb 3 oz baby was tougher to push out than the 10 lb 3 oz
baby. They were the same gestational age at a little over 41 weeks. People
are positively shocked when they hear I had a 10-pounder at home, and so far
it has been no use explaining that it wasn't much different from the
8-pounder, and maybe even a little easier.



(In my one experience, the actual pushing wasn't the hard part
at all, but rather all the rest of labor getting the cervix
open enough. But I understand that YMMV, and I was blessed with
a short pushing stage.)



With my first baby, I had an epidural, and pushing ended up being a breeze.
My second and third were born at home, and the pushing stage was so very,
very difficult. I had to push against a cervical lip both times, though.

Joy

Rose 1/99
Iris 2/01
Spencer 3/03


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
misc.kids FAQ on the Pregnancy AFP Screen and the Triple Screen [email protected] Pregnancy 0 January 16th 04 10:15 AM
misc.kids FAQ on the Pregnancy AFP Screen and the Triple Screen [email protected] Pregnancy 0 December 15th 03 10:42 AM
Lydia's Birthstory (long) Andrea Pregnancy 29 September 7th 03 07:23 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:16 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.