# Your First Baby



## Kellym (Jul 10, 2004)

A friend and I were just talking and she threw out some random statistic about when most first borns are born. I don't buy it so wanted to do a random poll.


----------



## Kellym (Jul 10, 2004)

Mine was right on his due date. I wasn't induced or anything, just woke up in the morning and my water had broken.


----------



## boscopup (Jul 15, 2005)

I'm probably skewing the results, since mine was *very* early.









It used to be that most first time moms had their babies around 41 weeks or so, but nowadays more OBs are inducing, so I think the average is getting earlier. I know lots of moms who were induced prior to 41 weeks.







:


----------



## BeBe123 (May 25, 2006)

My stubborn DS was 4 days late. And even then i still had to spend 4 hours straight trying to push him out. I guess he was comfy!


----------



## lunar forest (Feb 20, 2003)

my ds was just shy of three weeks "late", and fwiw, not at all postmature, just perfect.


----------



## lunar forest (Feb 20, 2003)

oh yeah, and statistics are "showing" now that more babies are being born on or before their dues dates than ever before. anyone have a guess as to why?! Babies who are not induces are still more likely to be born after their due dates. Two weeks before and two weeks after is still just full term.


----------



## Doodadsmom (May 27, 2005)

DS was ten days before EDD - but he might've been even sooner, if the CNM had stripped my membranes like she informed me she was going to. Oh well, at least she said something before she did it, even if she didn't actually ask permission. I hear that's more than some mothers get.

Oh, and she thought the baby was really small - so why exactly did she want to hurry things up? I really don't understand...I got the impression that she just routinely does this to all her patients.


----------



## annakiss (Apr 4, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *BeBe123*
My stubborn DS was 4 days late. And even then i still had to spend 4 hours straight trying to push him out. I guess he was comfy!

stubborn? At 4 days? That's practically early! Try 15 days.


----------



## Drummer's Wife (Jun 5, 2005)

DD was born the day after her due date!


----------



## annakiss (Apr 4, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lunar forest*
oh yeah, and statistics are "showing" now that more babies are being born on or before their dues dates than ever before. anyone have a guess as to why?! Babies who are not induces are still more likely to be born after their due dates. Two weeks before and two weeks after is still just full term.









I love that docs "don't really understand why" and are so into blaming moms for thinking that premature babies are still just fine. Gimme a break!


----------



## annakiss (Apr 4, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Kellym*
A friend and I were just talking and she threw out some random statistic about when most first borns are born. I don't buy it so wanted to do a random poll.









What was that statistic, btw?


----------



## HappyToBe (Jul 31, 2006)

late 5x







I guess that's just the way my body & Babies work.


----------



## andisunshine (May 2, 2006)

My son was born the day before his due date, no induction or c-section. Labor started two days before and he was born early in the a.m.
Andi


----------



## Jilian (Jun 16, 2003)

My DS was born 6 days before his "due date", but I always thought his due date was 7 days too late.


----------



## ecoteat (Mar 3, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *annakiss*
stubborn? At 4 days? That's practically early! Try 15 days.

Ha HA! My friend had her first baby a month ago... *23* days late!







And yes, they were pretty sure about the due date, she had been charting when they conceived, little Emmett just did not want to come out! (despite ALL efforts for a natural homebirth, he ended up being born via cesarian.)

I, on the other hand, went into labor with my first on my due date. She was born at 12:53 am, so she was 53 minutes late! I still chose "on my due date" for the poll, though.


----------



## DreamsInDigital (Sep 18, 2003)

My first was 11 days past his EDD, my second was 10 days past the EDD and my third was 15 days the EDD.


----------



## sarah0404 (May 28, 2006)

My 1st baby was 15 days late. I was induced







I don't know why, but for some reason I thought you weren't "allowed" to go any longer than 14 days. What, did I think the police were going to cart me off for a forced induction or something??? I was already at 3cm when I went into hospital, and I'd had some backache the night before, so i think if we had been left alone she'd probably have been 16 or 17 days late.

(I was a first baby, and I was apparently 4 days late)


----------



## Kellym (Jul 10, 2004)

Quote:

What was that statistic, btw
She said that something like 80% of all babies are born early.


----------



## Mama~Love (Dec 8, 2003)

All my babies have been born after the EDD. #1 was 4 days, #2 was 15, #3 was 17, #4 was 8, & #5 was 9.


----------



## MotheringHeart (Dec 18, 2005)

#1 was seven weeks early...though it was because I had an emergency appendectomy. So I'm probably skewing the results....


----------



## Robin926 (Jun 25, 2005)

bnak

i've read that on avg first babies are 10 days late. of course american doctors have to just F that all up with inductions, etc. i went the latest of anyone i know irl who's given birth in the last couple years (most of whom were in for inductions on or right after the EDD). i went into labor 10 days past EDD and ds was born the 11th day.


----------



## KiwiZ (Apr 4, 2004)

My 1st baby was a week early. I was grateful, as I am 5'3.5" and she was over 9 #!


----------



## LavenderMae (Sep 20, 2002)

My first was born at 38 weeks, no induction.


----------



## lunar forest (Feb 20, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *annakiss*
I love that docs "don't really understand why" and are so into blaming moms for thinking that premature babies are still just fine. Gimme a break!









Yeah, it kinda makes me wanna uke


----------



## lunar forest (Feb 20, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *KiwiZ*
My 1st baby was a week early. I was grateful, as I am 5'3.5" and she was over 9 #!

It's doubtful that a week or so would have made much of a difference. It's not the weight of the baby that would make it "more difficult" but the size of the head, which doesn't change much, if at all, in the last few weeks. Plus, most babies are born when they are ready, so it's impossible to say that IF I had gone x more days baby would have been too big, or x bigger. That's just an impossible to prove theory. *Trust your baby and your body!*


----------



## BelgianSheepDog (Mar 31, 2006)

I said "due date" even though I went into labor the day after it and she was born the day after that, since I don't consider two days after the edd to be "late."


----------



## lunar forest (Feb 20, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *BelgianSheepDog*
I said "due date" even though I went into labor the day after it and she was born the day after that, since I don't consider two days after the edd to be "late."

but an OB would. Statisticly it is "late" if not the exact date (especially since those are the only choices in the poll.)


----------



## mysticmomma (Feb 8, 2005)

This might be better as a weekly poll
Options:
Preterm (before 37 weeks)

37-38
38-39
39-40
40-41
41-42
42-43
43+

My bella was 42w6d


----------



## doula and mom (Nov 28, 2005)

I skew the stats; I had twin boys who were born (vaginally) at 34w2d due to Twin-to-Twin Transfusion Syndrome. #3, my daughter, was born naturally (ie, no induction) on her due date.

I've read some stat, I think it was from March of Dimes, that the average length of pregnancy now is 39 weeks







:


----------



## Sharlla (Jul 14, 2005)

DS1 was due Dec 19th. He was induced on Nov. 24th due to preeclamsia. Thankfully he was healthy, born 7 lbs 10 oz and 19 inches. He would have been a 9+ lber like DS2 had he been full term.


----------



## Bartock (Feb 2, 2006)

1 week early, according to doc and ultra sound, but who really knows I had MC before Taylor and got preg again without having AF so we really had to estimate my due date.


----------



## shelley4 (Sep 10, 2003)

#1 was 9 days late and #2 was 6 days early


----------



## savithny (Oct 23, 2005)

They were only two days apart - one from my charting, one from an early ultrasound.

My first was born the day between them, so I picked "on the due date."

Woke up just after midnight with back pains, DS arrived before 5pm. However, he looked postdates, according to the midwives - no vernix, wrinkly hands w/long nails, peeling skin, etc. Everyone kept asking me if I was sure of my dates.

My 2nd was born at 3am the day after her charting-calculated due date. Again, no vernix.


----------



## Bauhinia (Jul 26, 2006)

First baby was 2 days before due date; second baby was 3 days before.


----------



## mata (Apr 20, 2006)

my first was born two weeks "early" and I was so glad. My dad is a cpa and her due date was 4/15-I would have been highly irritated hearing about that year after year!


----------



## ABand3 (May 21, 2005)

I voted 'late', altho I like to think of him as 4 days 'above average'


----------



## eleven (Aug 14, 2004)

DD was born 11 days after her due date, but she was right on time.


----------



## lunar forest (Feb 20, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mysticmomma*
This might be better as a weekly poll
Options:
Preterm (before 37 weeks)

37-38
38-39
39-40
40-41
41-42
42-43
43+

My bella was 42w6d

That would make more sense. But there should be a "on EDD" because that's really quite unusual (and special, I guess.)


----------



## mamato3cherubs (Nov 30, 2004)

My first was born exactly on his due date, And I was certain of dates. I went into labor the day before and he came the day I said he would! 2nd was 4 days before, 3rd was 8 days after!


----------



## courtenay_e (Sep 1, 2005)

Dd was a freak. I am from a family where are the women deliver late (really, mom is one of seven girls. One delivered her only on her due date, but the rest went a min of 2 weeks late...two of them delivering a total of six of them at a full forty five weeks), and I am the only one, of all my aunts and female cousins, to deliver my kids early. Dd, my first, was ten days early. Ds, my second, was born 21 days early.


----------



## courtenay_e (Sep 1, 2005)

NEITHER were induced, by the way.


----------



## Snowdrift (Oct 15, 2005)

Mine was on her due date. Went into labor the morning before, but labor stuck around a good loooooong time so she was born the afternoon of her dute. 5.15 pm on 5/15--both her due date and her father's b-day. Cant' beat that. Oh, and clap of thunder in the background as she was born.

First time anything cool like that has ever happened to me--with dates and times and events all colliding.


----------



## ColoradoMama (Nov 22, 2001)

I have gone into labor naturally with all three.
#1 - 9 days early
#2 - 17 days early
#3 - 7 days late
#4 - to be determined!!!!


----------



## lizziejackie (Jun 1, 2005)

My first was born 3 days early by my accts, 6 days early by the sOB's. It probably would have been on day later had I been allowed to finish labor and push her out myself. My second was born 6 days late by their acct, but right on her EDD by my acct!


----------



## LizaBear (Feb 1, 2003)

Baby #1 was born at 38w 1d.


----------



## CryPixie83 (Jan 27, 2004)

My dd was born right around 42 weeks.


----------



## pageta (Nov 17, 2003)

Five days late according to when I knew I had conceived and 12 days late according to the ultrasound date. My membranes were stripped and then once we went to the hospital thinking I was in labor, it was prodromal so I had to have a low dose of pitocin. So I'm sure it would have been later had things been left alone.


----------



## elmh23 (Jul 1, 2004)

4 days late, no induction


----------



## Lousli (Nov 4, 2003)

4 weeks early, to the day, because of PROM


----------



## 2Sweeties1Angel (Jan 30, 2006)

My firstborn (and secondborn) were twins so I guess that messes up the statistics. They were born at 37 weeks, but everyone expected them to come earlier.


----------



## Jodie (Jul 18, 2002)

DD was born 3 days past when I thought she would come (the edd I gave myself) and 3 days before the edd the midwives gave me. So I guess she was on "time" but after edd.

I was a first born and I was 3 weeks late.


----------



## LilMama23 (Jul 8, 2005)

DD came naturally two weeks early.


----------



## littleteapot (Sep 18, 2003)

My daughter was born a week "late". No vernix at all but only a trim 6lbs 14oz! Very long though. She was swimming in newborn wear!

My son was born early due to the abnormality he had. Although, for what he had, he was born perfectly on time so I hesitate to call him a "preemie" (two weeks shy of 'full term'). I think he also came out when he needed to.


----------



## sargasso (Mar 20, 2005)

5 days early (not induced)


----------



## Kidzaplenty (Jun 17, 2006)

My first was born at 36 weeks. PROM.

1- 36 wks - Premature Rupture Of Membranes
2- 40 wks
3- 42 wks
4- 39 wks 6 days
5- 39 wks
6- 40 wks 3 days
7- 40 wks 3 days
8- 18 wks


----------



## USAmma (Nov 29, 2001)

dd1 was born 4 days early
dd2 was born 2 weeks early but tried to come at 23 weeks and a few times after that. We kept her in.







Then when I was ready for her to be born she didn't come for another 3 weeks!


----------



## Shelsi (Apr 4, 2005)

I didn't vote cause I didn't want to skew the results. Ds was born early (@ 39 wks) for an elective induction. Sure wish I'd known about MDC back then so I could have been educated about the risks first!

It seems pretty darn obvious to me though that most first time moms are going early because of inductions and scheduled c-sections. It really doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out.

I wonder what your results would be if you posted this poll on a mainstream parenting board? Now that would be interesting!


----------



## Kidzaplenty (Jun 17, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Shelsi*
I wonder what your results would be if you posted this poll on a mainstream parenting board? Now that would be interesting!

I would love to see the results of a poll like that!


----------



## katerkat (Aug 13, 2005)

DS was 11 days early and an induction - although I went into labor the night before the induction. He would have been out within the next few days if I hadn't gone forward with the induction.


----------



## autumn_faune (Jun 15, 2005)

DD was 4 weeks late, due Oct 6, born Nov. 2.

No, the dates weren't off. And no, she wasn't postmature. My familiy just cooks 'em long.

(I was only 2 weeks 'late' when my mom's labor was induced. and they said I seemed a little preemie)


----------



## eminer (Jan 21, 2003)

#1: 7 days past EDD
#2: 9 days past EDD


----------



## Nora'sMama (Apr 8, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *boscopup*

It used to be that most first time moms had their babies around 41 weeks or so, but nowadays more OBs are inducing, so I think the average is getting earlier. I know lots of moms who were induced prior to 41 weeks.







:

Yes, I currently have two friends who are pregnant - around 39 and 40 weeks respectively - neither has reached their due date and both are incredulous that they are "still" pregnant. The one whose due date is almost here says that at her OB practice, if you are "still" pregnant on your due date you come in and have monitoring done and then meet with the doctor to "decide what to do".







: 40 weeks is the new 42 weeks.


----------



## ~PurityLake~ (Jul 31, 2005)

I've only had one child so far (expecting number 2 on 8-14-06). Abigail was due on thursday, may 26th. She was born on sunday, may 29th, 2005 at 6:13 pm. I think she would have been born later than that had my labor not been induced by a tired and impatient midwife.


----------



## RockStarMom (Sep 11, 2005)

My daughter was 3 days early. I convinced myself that she was going to be late(I was very late when I was born) and had this long list of stuff to do before she was born. I was in denial for so long that I was actually in labor. I was like, "I can't be in labor! I haven't finished all the stuff on my to-do list!"


----------



## mfp02 (Jan 5, 2005)

Early.


----------



## flapjack (Mar 15, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Doodadsmom*
DS was ten days before EDD - but he might've been even sooner, if the CNM had stripped my membranes like she informed me she was going to. Oh well, at least she said something before she did it, even if she didn't actually ask permission. I hear that's more than some mothers get.

Oh, and she thought the baby was really small - so why exactly did she want to hurry things up? I really don't understand...I got the impression that she just routinely does this to all her patients.

Stripping membranes twice a week from 38 weeks has been shown in some studies to get babies out before the 42 week mark (I think only 6% went post-term.) Stripping membranes once, generally, does diddly-squat.


----------



## KiwiZ (Apr 4, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lunar forest*
It's doubtful that a week or so would have made much of a difference. It's not the weight of the baby that would make it "more difficult" but the size of the head, which doesn't change much, if at all, in the last few weeks. Plus, most babies are born when they are ready, so it's impossible to say that IF I had gone x more days baby would have been too big, or x bigger. That's just an impossible to prove theory. *Trust your baby and your body!*

I did trust my baby and my body, I was not induced. It is OK to be grateful to not be carrying 9 pounds of baby in a petite body!


----------



## CEG (Apr 28, 2006)

My DD was due March 28 and was born April 12 after induction. DD was very chubby, peeling skin, no vernix. My DS was due November 17 but was born November 19. Had vernix, a pound and a half lighter, and no peeling skin. With my son though, I took castor oil and EPO to try to avoid an induction. I was a first baby and was 2-3 weeks overdue.


----------



## fuzzypeach (Oct 28, 2004)

I said on my due date but it was really three days before the due date my CNM assigned me. I had several that were earlier according to u/s, and other calculation methods. Close enough


----------



## Ruthla (Jun 2, 2004)

2 days early- which I consider to be very much "on time." I voted "early" in the poll.


----------



## laprettygurl (Dec 22, 2004)

39w5d.

So only two days early. I hadn't done any cleaning because I was convinced she'd be at least two weeks late.


----------



## CortLong (Jun 4, 2003)

DD #1 was 17 days past her 'due date'.


----------



## kristenburgess (Sep 15, 2002)

She came 10 days late!


----------



## pbreffe (Nov 12, 2005)

My first was born at 37w 5d... no induction... labor started on its own.

My second was born 37w 6d.... all natural. To top it off he was 9lb 12oz!


----------



## ashleep (Jul 20, 2004)

dd was 6 days early. spontaneous labor.


----------



## treemom2 (Oct 1, 2003)

Both my children were right around 3 week earlier than my due date. However, with DD my water broke (about 2 hours following a small car accident) and I followed docs advise to go to the hospital if this happened--so was put on pit and ended with a c-sec. I'm not sure if she would have come that day had the events not been as they were and if I had been more informed then!


----------



## Sailmom (Sep 23, 2004)

Exactly 2 weeks late. MW stripped my membranes 3 times in the last week to no avail. 66 hour labor - but went from 5cm to birth in 2 hours.


----------



## Mama Poot (Jun 12, 2006)

Both of my boys were born within at least 12 hours of their due date. I wonder why I'm so punctual when it comes to that







Its nice having predictability though.


----------



## Jazzmin (Jun 29, 2006)

My first was three weeks late. I was sooo uncomfortable.
My second was a week early and labor was MUCH easier.


----------



## Amylcd (Jun 16, 2005)

3 weeks late


----------



## kalirush (Jun 14, 2005)

3 weeks early (according to the due date for when I know she was concieved), and fully cooked.

All five of my mom's came early, so it's not a huge surprise. I think maybe we just cook 'em quick.

Julia


----------



## *caitlinsmom* (Jul 21, 2006)

DD was two weeks early... but I was induced due to some pregnancy complications.


----------



## thefragile7393 (Jun 21, 2005)

Almost a week early......supposedly he was due Jan 25th but he came on the 17th instead.


----------



## Jennifer3141 (Mar 7, 2004)

DD arrived right on time.


----------



## ShiningStar (Jul 8, 2006)

DD was born 4 days before her EDD. To me that was early becuase I'd convinced myself she'd be born 41-42wks. It seemed like most of the first time mothers I knew were going at least 41wks.


----------



## Hayes (Nov 20, 2001)

My oldest DD was on her due date. My next 3 children were 12, 8, and 8 days late.


----------



## mommycakes (Sep 21, 2005)

My dd was 11 days early. She was born on my last scheduled work day (needless to say, I was NOT at work that day). I was expecting a few weeks to rest and wait but she saw otherwise. It was wonderful though. As tired as I had been during the week (I went into labor on Friday), I somehow mustered super-energy to totally scrub my house clean on Thursday and then awoke the next morning with bloody show and contractions soon after. I spent most of the day at home and the rest at the hospital with my husband and awesome midwives. My beautiful daughter was born at 1:42 am. Everything was perfect. Natural, empowering and awesome. I can't wait to do it again. I only hope I'll be blessed with another small, though healthy, babe _and_ to deliver a bit early--I can't imagine going beyond my due date, though I'd deal with it, I'm sure


----------



## mummymore (Jul 14, 2006)

Ours was one week early. These hormones are driving me crazy. Finding that - VirginMaternity.com - is a useful site for first time moms. Taking it one day at a time. thanks mama rosa for your help!


----------



## wannabe (Jul 4, 2005)

Better than a random poll

Quote:

LENGTH OF PREGNANCY

In the early 1800s a German obstetrician simply declared that pregnancy lasts ten moon months counting from the start of the menstrual cycle prior to the pregnancy. (2) It took nearly 200 years for researchers to investigate whether this was, in fact, true. It turns out that it wasn't. When researchers in the late 1980s followed a group of healthy, white women with regular menstrual cycles, they discovered that *pregnancy in first-time mothers averaged eight days longer than this, or forty-one weeks plus one day* . The average was three days longer than forty weeks in women with prior births. The researchers also refer to other studies suggesting that other races may have average pregnancy lengths that are shorter than white women.
http://parenting.ivillage.com/pregnancy/0,,jb56,00.html

Quote:

For primiparas, the median duration of gestation from assumed ovulation to delivery was 274 days, significantly longer than the predicted 266 days (P = .0003). For multiparas, the median duration of pregnancy was 269 days, also significantly longer than the prediction (P = .019). Moreover, the median length of pregnancy in primiparas proved to be significantly longer than that for multiparas (P = .0032). Thus, this study suggests that when estimating a due date for private-care white patients, one should count back 3 months from the first day of the last menses, then add 15 days for primiparas or 10 days for multiparas, instead of using the common algorithm for Naegele's rule.

Mittendorf R et al. The length of uncomplicated human gestation. Obstet Gynecol 1990;75(6):929-32.


----------



## orangebird (Jun 30, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Robin926*
bnak

i've read that on avg first babies are 10 days late. of course american doctors have to just F that all up with inductions, etc. i went the latest of anyone i know irl who's given birth in the last couple years (most of whom were in for inductions on or right after the EDD). i went into labor 10 days past EDD and ds was born the 11th day.

This cracks me up. If the average baby is 10 days late, then why don't they move the duedate of babies to reflect that extra 10 days. Do I make any sense? Like the way it is now, DS was "due" may 5th, shouldn't his duedate really have been may 15th? Since average is 10 days after that, shouldn't we correct for it? He was born the 19th.


----------



## ~PurityLake~ (Jul 31, 2005)

Robin926 said:


> bnak
> 
> i've read that on avg first babies are 10 days late. quote]
> 
> ...


----------



## Crazy Basil (May 22, 2006)

Two weeks late... I actually went into labor 6 hours before my appointment at the hospital for induction (don't get me started, NEVER again will I go that route.), thank goodness.


----------



## Past_VNE (Dec 13, 2003)

My first (only, so far) was due Dec. 20. He was born the evening of Dec. 17. He was three days early by EDD standards, or by the "avg of 10 days late standard" he was 13 days early.

He looked correctly "cooked" to me.


----------



## 2+twins (Apr 20, 2004)

10 days over for my first.


----------



## BirthInStyle (May 4, 2006)

My DD was born 3 days after her EDD. My midwife was surprised that she came that early. She had a statistic of most first time moms going 11 days past their EDD when left to go into labor on their own.

My last 2 doula clients, both primips, gave birth on the same day! One was 8 days past her EDD and for the other it was on her EDD.


----------



## illinoismommy (Apr 14, 2006)

My son was 11 days early. Everyone told me he would be late because firstborns are usually late, but I knew he would be early... I could just feel it I guess.


----------



## joiedevivre184 (Oct 24, 2005)

I don't have kids yet, so i voted for my mom.







(I was her 1st).

I was born on my due date.


----------



## DocsNemesis (Dec 10, 2005)

I find it funny (ok, not really funny) that they concider 37 weeks full term, but 42 weeks is too late. It seems like if 37 weeks is term, then 43 weeks should be concidered late. Its just stupid anyway-our bodies and our babies know when it is time to come out.
Anywho....my first was 2.5 weeks over and I was induced (mainly because I was begging to be though, my OB didnt really care). My mom was 44w1d when she had me (I was her first). My step mom was 2 weeks late with her first-and all the other 4 kids she had too. My gma had her first on her due date and then the rest were late-and each one came later, lol. And my dalmation was always overdue







. Seriously, you've seen 101 dalmations right? They are supposed to come out all white-my dogs pups always had their spots and her last couple of litters had their eyes open when they were born! I think the longest over she went was about 4-5 weeks. So even dogs go over with no problem-she never lost a pup.


----------



## wombatclay (Sep 4, 2005)

Went into active labor with dd 15 days "late". It was another 32 hours before she "arrived" though...


----------



## BCmamaof6 (Sep 7, 2004)

My babies have been:
#1 @ 41 weeks
#2 @ 37 weeks
#3 @ 38 weeks
#4 @ 36 weeks
#5 @ 38 weeks

I'm guessing this one will be 38 weeks.


----------



## DocsNemesis (Dec 10, 2005)

Hye, mommycakes is my neighbor







(ok, not really, I just noticed she lives in Bothell too)


----------



## XanaduMama (May 19, 2006)

I said "late" but it was only 2 days after the due date.


----------



## 7kiddosmom (Feb 18, 2005)

My first was born at 27 weeks. I have gone on to have 6 full term babies w/ no preterm labors. All have been early execpt 5 and 6 and they were 3 and 2 days past my edd.


----------



## curlyfry (Feb 16, 2005)

Mine was "late" if you consider 8 hrs past my due date late


----------



## gen_here (Dec 31, 2005)

We were told in our Bradley class that the average woman goes 10 days over with her first baby.

My son was 9 over at 41w2d =)


----------



## lotusdebi (Aug 29, 2002)

My son was born all of three days before my official EDD. I think that my membranes being stripped two days prior to that had something to do with it.


----------



## marvelous (Aug 5, 2005)

I picked early, but DD was born only two days before her due date. To me that is more "on-time."


----------



## proudmamanow (Aug 12, 2003)

Dd was born 7 days after her due date...which I understand is about average for first timers...


----------



## Synchro246 (Aug 8, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Kellym*
She said that something like 80% of all babies are born early.

I was under the impression that the 2 week window before and after the "due date" was a statistical bell curve- with + or - two standard diviations being the two weeks on either side of the date. If the "window" was developed by a statistition like I thought 98.whatever% will deliver within the 2 weeks on either side.
I am also under the impression that the due date was derived from a sample of all mothers and that first-timers are pregnant 8 days longer (on average) than multips.

I know that inductions would greatly affect our current numbers on late and early.


----------



## Past_VNE (Dec 13, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *BCmamaof5*
My babies have been:
#1 @ 41 weeks
#2 @ 37 weeks
#3 @ 38 weeks
#4 @ 36 weeks
#5 @ 38 weeks

I'm guessing this one will be 38 weeks.

Oooo...this is like an SAT question...I think you're wrong as the answer is...

35.


----------



## babygrant (Mar 10, 2005)

i was induced 11 days late (pre-mdc)


----------



## Belle (Feb 6, 2005)

My dd was born 10days before her EDD.


----------



## mirlee (Jul 30, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Nora'sMama*
Yes, I currently have two friends who are pregnant - around 39 and 40 weeks respectively - neither has reached their due date and both are incredulous that they are "still" pregnant. The one whose due date is almost here says that at her OB practice, if you are "still" pregnant on your due date you come in and have monitoring done and then meet with the doctor to "decide what to do".







: 40 weeks is the new 42 weeks.

This happened to me! I swear that is why I had a c-section. He was not ready to come out at all. I just wish I were stronger at that time to let him bake just a little while longer.







:


----------



## Shahbazin (Aug 3, 2006)

I was due May 24th, figured as a 1st time mom, I'd run late, so plenty of time to finish getting stuff ready - water broke & I went into labor May 6th, had DD just before midnight on the 8th.......she was a little girl (6 lbs, 2 oz) but I guess she just wanted out!


----------



## Lilcrunchie (Jun 16, 2004)

6 days early, and my ovulation was absolutely on cd 14 (had IUI/injectables to conceive DS). I had contractions (signficant ones, not just B-H) for 3 weeks or so prior.


----------



## pjlioness (Nov 29, 2001)

I was induced with cervacil (no pitocin, thank G-d), so my answer messes with your results, and ds1 was born at 38 weeks and 3 days (approx.). Ds2 was born at home 4 days after my due date, so I figure maybe ds1 was two weeks early.


----------



## dnr3301 (Jul 4, 2003)

I voted late, but it was only 3 days or so. I was never really all that sure of my dates.


----------



## hunnybumm (Nov 1, 2003)

I went into labor the day after my due date with both my boys. I had them 3 days after their due dates.

With DS#1 I went in on my due date, we did a NST and all was fine. We scheduled an induction for 2 days later. Thankfully I went into labor the day before my induction, went to the hospital 4 hours before my induction appointment. All the nurses kept saying "Hey! Your early!"

With DS#2 I had an appointment 4 days before my due date (I think??). After that appointment they MW scheduled me for 3 more weekly appointments. I gaspsed and said "Oh my god.. I hope I don't need all of those!" but she said she didn't want to jinx me so she scheduled all of them. Thankfully I didn't need any of them!


----------

