Due Date Dilemma

Ok so here's my dilemma, My doctor is saying that my due date is November 1st according to his measurements of the babies on ultrasound.. I however have a difference of opinion because i go by the first day of my last missed period which was January 14, 2008 and have 29 days in a cycle, which would put my due date at October 21st or 22nd. I have went to all the web sites with due date calculators and put my info in and they come up with the same date as me. I really don't trust the calculations of the ultrasound because of my previous pregnancy, my doctor said that my baby had a growth retardation and he had stopped growing at 36 weeks. He said he measured him and he was about 5 lbs and about 16 inches long, he decided to take him the next day and to my doctors suprise my baby came out 7 lbs 7 oz and 18 inches long so obviously ultrasounds can be wrong. I know a week and a half is not a big difference but when you have to carry twins in a tiny body frame it is Lol!! What do you guy's think???

 

Hmmm, I don't know?! I don't want to say that 1.5 weeks isn't much, because for some babies it could mean alot but I, personally, don't know which one I'd go by. I know you said that the u/s was wrong with your other pregnancy, but what are your babies measuring now? Are they good by his date or yours?

 

Did you ask him why he goes by u/s measurements instead of LMP? I have never heard of that. My doc always went by LMP and then when we measured would tell me "They are measuring 3 weeks 1 day or whatever" but never based my due date on that. ardon:

 

Same here. My doctor estimates my due date from egg retrieval but he always told how many days ahead or behind they were measuring based on the U/S. He didnt use that as the due date though.

 

I asked him but he seemed confused. We are military and are in Belgium so we have a huge langusage barrier we have to work with. But like you thought they went by LMP, maby they do it diffrent here. I guess i can ask again and see if he understands better.

 

Both of my previous pregnancies went by LMP, but now we are stationed in Belgium and i just thought they counted different than we do in the states.

 

It is my understanding that EARLY (8 week, I think) ultrasound is more accurate than LMP - because even if you're regular, there can be slight variations in your cycle from time to time. And at the 8 week marker, the development of a normal baby should be very consistent - allowing the u/s to date the baby 7w5d or 8w0d, etc. My OB does date this way, which annoys me because I think of myself being 34 weeks today based on LMP, but they always say I'm two days behind that. Such a minor point, but it really is a mental beat down at this point ...

My suspicion - and I don't know if this is the true motivation - is recent research that has come out regarding the development of babies and how important the dating is. I have had two elective c-secions - my first, in 2004, was scheduled at 38w1d - my OB was fine with anything over 38 weeks, which was the protocol back in the old (ha) days. When I had #2 in 2007, the protocol had changed to 39 weeks - I'm referring to journal articles, not just the whim of an OB. I had #2 at 38w6d, based on LMP, because 39 weeks fell on the weekend and it was July and I was hot and miserable. I have always been very regular and felt confident in my dates - particularly confident because I was trying to AVOID getting pregnant right then - I have a weird obsession with fall babies - July was not part of MY plan! After having my first at 38 weeks, I really thought it was cruel and unusual of my new OB (we had moved to a new city) to make me be pregnant for another week. As it turned out, my baby boy was one of a teeny tiny percentage of full term babies who decide not to produce surfactant (lung lubricant that everyone produces to make their lungs fully inflate) - a problem most common in white male babies, referred to as "whimpy white male syndrome," nice. So he proceeded to blow several large holes in his lungs that were sticking together (check out what 56 ccs looks like on the side of a baby bottle - that's how big of an air pocket, or pneumothorax, he created in his chest cavity) - he was on an oscillator, chest tubed, I was asked if we would like last rites, etc. - scary stuff - and stayed in the NICU for 5 full weeks. Then got to be under house arrest during RSV season for EIGHT months. He turned two last week and is no worse for wear - but holy cow, it was a scary experience. One other note - this problem was not due to a c-section and not having fluid squeezed out of his lungs - a problem often cited in discussions here - a surfactant deficiency is a different problem ...

Back to the initial question - one of the points I've read of the latest and greatest opinions is the importance of dating the baby as it relates to the lung development issue and how just a day or two can make a difference - and the recommend method for dating is the early ultrasound. As much as I hate being a couple of days behind where I think I should be, I do NOT want to go through the NICU drama that we had with our little boy - so I'm going with the ultrasound date that my OB is using (except in my dreams, where I am two days ahead).

 

I have no idea how they are measuring, we are living in Belgium because my husband is in the military and they do there measurements different than we do in the states so it's hard to know. The next appt i will try to explane and see if he knows what i'm talking about..

 

Good luck at your next appointment! My twins are consistently measuring 1 to 2 weeks ahead on ultrasounds but no one has changed my due date...I was secretly kinda hoping they would LOL! I'm smaller too and at only 32 weeks I am seriously ginormous! Do you know anyone who could come with to translate for you? That would be hard to have such a language barrier. :hug: Good luck!

 

Ok here's an update on my dilemma. I went for my 27 week 5 day ultrasound today and everything looks great with both babies. My doctor said that both babies are measuring and weighing the same as a singleton baby would now. so both babies at 27 weeks are around 3 to 3 1/2 pounds each he said that they were big for 27 weeks so i still think that he is off on my due date by two weeks but i guess it will just have to be a suprise when they come!!!

 

determining EDD's is such a tricky business! Going by your LMP is not necessarily accurate b/c it makes assumptions based around when you ovulate that could be off (as I believe in my case) by as much as 5 days. I tended to ovulate on cd 19 rather than dc 14, which i predicted by a LMP estimate. That means very different things, like going into PTL at 32/33 weeks is quite different if my babies true gestational age is 31/32 weeks!

 

I'm not sure what to tell you about the due date dilemma, but I have to agree with you that u/s are not always accurate especially late in the pregnancy. 6 days before my daughter was born we had an u/s and she was 8lbs 13oz. Therefore, I decided to go for a VBAC. Turned out she was actually 10lbs 11oz. and I ended up with a repeat c-section.

So what did an earlier u/s estimate as your due date?

 

Those things aren't alway accurate but those weights do sound quite large for 27 weeks.