small for dates (26 wks pregnant)

[buttercupSE11]

Hi,

Just seeking some advice.I'm 26 weeks pregnant with my 1st baby. Had my midwife app today and measured at 23cm. It's not a concern at the moment but midwife said if I still measure small at my next app I will have to have a growth scan.Baby is very active. I eat well plus I'm very small and slim. People seem to think I should eat more and it's making me think It's my fault. Felt a bit down today and shed a few tears.

What does anyone else think? a few opinions would be helpful.

Thanks

[Fuschia]

I don't think the measuring with the tape is that accurate, and different mws can measure the same belly different anyway

The size of the bump relates as much to baby position and fluid levels as it does to size

A scan to actually check the baby's size might be the recommended precaution - but chances are it would be fine

So I wouldn't worry just yet!

And fwiw I hardly ate at all during my twin pg but delivered two fairly hefty babies in the end!

[nunheadmum]

I measured small all during my first pregnancy, was on 4 weekly scans and delivered a totally normal sized baby - that didn't fit any of the small clothes I'd bought.

I think they can be over cautious in mentioning ANY risk factor and they certainly made me over anxious.

If you're eating a good, balanced diet then you're doing all you can. Try not to let it all worry you.

[MrsLL2b]

I agree, please don't worry, some people just have smaller babies or your bump may be smaller if for example you have quite toned stomach muscles etc.

I definitely found different midwive measured my bump differently each time.

I think if there was anything unusual it would have come up in your 20 week scan. If they do offer you any growth scans you could take them just for the peace of mind and to have another peek at your little person.

If you think how varied the population are in shape and size it makes you realise how unlikely it is that every pregnant person is going to grow in the same way or that their babies will fit some sort of standard pattern. It is all just based on averages. Keep doing what you are doing and try not to worry....oh and I have heard several times that you only need to eat the equivelent of an apple a day in extra calories from 7 months and before that your standard diet is fine.

One of my best friends is absolutely tiny, had a teeny bump at 9 months (you would have thought she was 6/7 months) and had 9ib-ers both times! Good luck.

[Pickle]

I consistently measured small in all 3 pregnancies, generally about 3cm smaller than dates, and had perfectly healthy babies. I have a small frame, and each baby was just over 6lbs at birth, but all absolutely normal.

[dulwichgirl2]

My bumps were a cause of much concern and measuring by 22 year olds with those ridiculous tape measures - please it is 2012!- as none of my pgcies were visible till the last month. A lot has to do with how you carry the baby and some women carry classically straight out in front, others balloon from the neck down and I seemed to squash all my internal organs instead, giving rise to various other issues like heartburn and a cough that would not shift and worried me a great deal.

However having said all this, each 20 week scan predicted the eventual average to large (8.5 to nine pounds - is that big any more?) baby I would have. What did your scan predict? I think I would probably be asking for a second measurement and then a scan. I am not sure I would leave it too long as it is your first baby and you want to know as much as possible ASAP I imagine. Are you averse to another scan?

[dulwichgirl2]

Ps if you are eating well then you are doing your very best. Please don't beat yourself up over what is probably a non problem anyway! Plenty of room for "mother's guilt" when the baby is born. ;-) xx

[Saffron]

Neither measuring the bump nor scans are very effective at predicting the size of the baby. What the scan can help drs to understand is if there are growth anomalies, like head:body ratios, or if there are problems with placental growth.

From the size of my bump and my scans, MWs all thought I would have a small/average baby. What actually popped out was a nearly 9 lb whopper (and yes, dulwichgirl2, that IS still considered large, avg being around 7-7.5 lb)! MWs were surprised, but one older MW did say that sometimes young healthy mothers have small bumps though produce large babies b/c the mother's body is very efficient.

My friend had IVF, so she know her conception date. When she had her first scan, they thought the baby was much younger b/c of small size. My friend had to show them her IVF cert, so they could give her an accurate due date. Her baby was completely normal when delivered at 9 months.

Have an extra scan for peace of mind, but in the meantime try not to worry about it. xx

[midivydale]

Hey,

Please try not to worry. I too had to have several growth scans which were very traumatic at the time but all was well in the end. What i would say is that kings as well as some midwives are very cautious when something is not bang on 50th centile and it does lead to extra worry and stress for the parents to be. I was told our baby had femur bone below 3rd centile which was cause for concern...turned out lil guy jus has short legs but the worry was truly awful.

Stay OFF google and even though it is impossible not to worry try to seek comfort from the fact that they are thorough and on top of things.

X

[hellosailor]

Yes please don't worry, it's very common. I measured small at some appointments and big at others! Naturally I worried each time, hoho! My daughter was 8lb 9oz.

My friend had several extra scans as they were worried her baby wasn't growing at the expected rate (she was measuring small) and her daughter was 9lb 3oz, I don't think the tape measure is that accurate..

[etta166]

I wouldn't worry, but do go for the growth scans for some peace of mind. And if anyone tells you to eat more, then you can tell them that is total nonsense! It won't change the size of your baby at all (unless you are obese with type II diabetes).

I measured 3-5cm under expected size in both my pregnancies, and hardly looked pregnant at all until 7/8 months. However, the growth scans I has every 2 weeks always showed a small but perfectly formed baby and I had two 3kg babies at full term. So all perfectly normal in the end, just a bit smaller than average baby from a bigger than averare Mum.

Your own birth weight can also be good to know, as small babies tend to have small babies if that makes sense. I was a 2.5kg baby at full term, so my babies seemed quite big to my Mum.

[Kes]

Same from me, try not to worry too much, I was sent for a growth scan after a GP thought I was measureing small, the lady doing the scan took one look at me and said I was fine, did the scan anyway, predicted 8lb somthing baby and when she was born she was 9lb 10! I'm very tall, I suspect that confused the measureing.

Go for the scan if they suggest it though - always nice to get another peek!

[Fmm]

Please don't worry. I would agree with all the above posts. I measured small both pregnancies and both times delivered above average size babies. I had additional growth scans every 4-6 weeks through both pregnancies due to midwife concerns and would say enjoy the chance to see your baby again, what a treat!

[buttercupSE11]

Thanks for your response. All the comments have been great-I feel a lot more at ease now and will get my partner to read all the responses I've had!

I haven't been told a predicted weight of my baby. If I do have to go for a growth scan it will be exciting to see my baby again more fully formed!

Thanks again x

[lilygogan]

Hi, I measured small my whole pregnancy and had loads of groth scans.

At neary 2 weeks overdue I still only measure 35. And my healthy baby girl came out 7lb 3oz :)

[buttercupSE11]

Thanks for your response lilygogan. Just goes to show this measuring method is not a guide at all. I also weighed 7lb 3oz at birth!

[dulwichgirl2]

The more I read the more I think those dratted tape measures need to go!

[sillywoman]

My (admittedly limited) understanding of the tape measure thing is that it helps the MW to build an overall picture of how the pregnancy's progressing i.e. it's not intended to be used as an absolute, rather as a guide to used along side blood pressure, urine samples and other physical signs & symptoms that the pregnant woman may present with.

I also don't think that it's always meant to be giving an indication of the size of the baby, rather how much fluid is or isn't around baby. I thought that MW's allowed for a 3cm variable. So if everything else is ok they wouldn't be too worried about a woman measuring larger or smaller than her gestation as long as it falls within that variable? The OP being a first time Mum it sounds like her MW is taking a cautious approach.

Used in this way the tape measure is a very helpful tool for the midwife. What could replace it, & why?

Those who have said that the possibility of a scan if the OP measures small next time is a belt & braces approach have hit the nail on the head. We're lucky enough to live in a society that is careful with the health of it's pregnant mothers and unborn children. Sometimes this can mean the approach taken by healthcare professionals feels too cautious or interventional, but taken as a whole across the entire population of pregnant women the caution pays dividends. It's highly unlikely the OP will have any issues at all, but if she does how brilliant that the MW is able to catch them quickly (with the help of her trusty tapemeasure).

[Saffron]

Sillywoman, that's very well written!

Now ButtercupSE11, take eveything that Sillywoman posted above here about tape measures & MWs, and translate it to weight scales & HVs, when Baby is born and you start going to the baby clinic for weigh-ins.

In my experience (and in a lot of other people's experiences too, if the Forum is anything to go by), HVs will worry if your baby is too big/small, doesn't gain weight quickly enough/too quickly. And you know what, babies (just like bumps) grow in all different sizes and rates, and 99% of the time, it's absolutely fine!!

[fmay]

I measured 3-5cm under all the way through my three pregnancies, had a small neat bump and everyone kept saying 'a nice small baby'... But they were all big, my second 9lb2 and third over 8lb too. These belly measurements don't tell you much. I obviously didn't have masses of water or extra fat, my small bumps were all baby, as they say. Beware growth scans tend to be wildly inaccurate too. I know a couple of ladies who were terrified to be told they had huge 9-10lb babies but they were just over 7lb at birth!!

[sandy_rose]

Re growth scans I don't think they're very accurate in terms of predicting size of baby. I had a late growth scan, was told the baby was 6lbs and two week later my 9lbs 10oz baby was born. I measured normal with the tape measure. They will check for other things during growth scan - see how te placenta and cord are functioning as well as the amount of fluid round the baby, it takes about ten mins so if you're offered one it might be worth going for peace of mind.

[Yak]

Lots of good advice in this thread. I never measured more than 34 cm but went on to have a health baby bang on 50th centile for weight. But the tape measure is there as a rough and ready guide, and my take is we are very lucky to have Kings on our doorstep to get anything checked out. Enjoy the growth scans, but take all the predictions with a grain of salt. At the end of the day it's people trying to draw lines on computers magnified considerably. I was having scans every other week and apparently the baby's legs managed to "shrink" between wk 34 and 36. Also quite alarmingly I had one set of measurements that gave the brain bigger than the head (the mind literally boggles!).

[dulwichgirl2]

Have you and another tape measure done? If small again, I'd get a scan to be sure of specific measurements that only the scan can provide. (this is different from the estimated weight which is discussed at length above.)