# Dumb Question: Do bigger babies hurt more???



## BabyMommee (Sep 30, 2007)

Yes, I'm sure this sounds like a completely dumb question, but I just wanted to hear from someone that has had both a small baby and a bigger baby - does it hurt ALOT more? Does it take ALOT longer?

My son was born premature (at 33 weeks) so he was 4 pounds 11.5 ounces. My entire labor (from the time I woke up that morning) was 3 hours. I pushed for 15 minutes. Don't get me wrong, it hurt like crazy and it was the hardest thing I've ever done, but now ... I'm going to do everything I possible can to make sure this baby cooks alot longer. Do I need to expect a much longer harder labor?


----------



## library lady (Sep 3, 2007)

Bigger baby does not automatically equal more pain. There are a lot of factors that go into how painful the birth is. My first was 7lbs. 12 oz. and hurt like crazy with a longish (12 hr) labor. The rest of my kids were over 9 lbs (biggest was 9lbs. 14 oz.) and the labors were short and not near as painful.


----------



## 3pink1blue (Jun 23, 2008)

my most painful birth was my first one. she weighed 7lb14oz. the next three were easy comparatively. they were 9lb2oz, 9lb10oz and 8lb11oz.


----------



## Full Heart (Apr 27, 2004)

My first was 7 lbs and the rest were 8 lbs 3 oz (1), 8 lbs 8 oz (2) and 9 lbs (3). I don't think their size had anything to do with the pain. Nuchal hand seemed to have a lot to do with it though. Those 2 labors hurt like well...you know. My labors are 4-5 hours long so size didn't have anything to do with that either.

I think it just depends on the baby and the mother. Whatever circumstances are present at the time.


----------



## BabyMommee (Sep 30, 2007)

That's so good to hear! Having my son was super high stress. I didn't know if he was going to live or die or have lots of problems - I just had no idea what babies were like at 33 weeks. It felt SO wrong to be pushing out my baby that should still be in my tummy. I'm much more educated and confident now, so I'm hoping to have a peaceful birth (and a fully cooked baby!) I'm sure like pp's said, the environment and circumstances have a lot to do with the amount of pain.


----------



## snowmom5 (May 8, 2008)

I delivered my twins at 33w following p-prom and the bigger one was 4 lbs 15 oz (over a pound bigger than his brother). He has a big head (still does six years later). I had an epidural but for some reason, maybe it was wearing off, I don't know, I still felt the tearing. I knew I was going to tear. ick. but no "ring of fire". Pushed for twin A for maybe 10-20 minutes, hard pushing (tore anal sphinctor muscle).

Next birth, 7 lbs 9 oz at term, also had an epidural, it did not hurt. In fact, it was a piece of cake (once I had the epi; the contractions themselves were more painful, but they seem to get more painful with each labor regardless of size of baby). Labor lasted a similar amount of time from start to finish compared to the twin labor. Pushing was very brief - maybe 5 minutes. Used hypnobirthing "breathing down the baby" pushing with top of abdominal muscles rather than rear end muscles. Once the water broke he nearly slid right out but for some skin in his way.

Next birth, 6 lbs 14 oz, no meds whatsoever, had the "ring of fire", etc. Very fast, intense labor. So clearly the last one hurt the most - I was having the fetal ejection reflex, and eventually I started consciously pushing too, just to get it over with. Knew I would tear (I always do); didn't care. Wanted him out!

So, comparing premie to small to medium sized babies, granted there were major medication differences, but oddly enough the biggest one hurt the least.

good luck!!


----------



## Jilian (Jun 16, 2003)

I think it is all about head circumference. My babies were both pretty small - DS1 was 7 lbs 5 ozs and DS2 was 6lbs 4 ozs but DS2 hurt a LOT more. He was in a funky position.


----------



## annekh23 (Nov 1, 2008)

I think there are often so many differences between labours that it is really hard to tell if size was the thing that made it different. My 2nd baby was 3lb bigger than my first, it was longer and definitely hurt more, but I think the whole difference could be put down to her being posterior. I was literally just talking with a friend who had twins at 34 weeks, followed by an enormous baby - more than their combined weights and they were just under 5lb and 5.5lb, she said it was a lot harder work as the twins had come so easily, but she didn't mention any more pain.


----------



## dogmom327 (Apr 19, 2007)

I really hope not. DS was 6 lb. 2 oz. and I can't imagine crowning could hurt any worse than that.


----------



## mama to 2 girls (Dec 11, 2006)

For me it was true but fat squishes I think it has to do with position and head size...dd1 was 8lbs. 3oz. with a 14" head and I had an epi that was wearing off, I only felt pain when she crowned...dd2 was 7lbs. 12oz with only a 13 1/2" head born at a FSBC so obviously no meds and I didn't even feel her head coming out, it was easy peasy!...I mean don't get me wrong it hurt but not enough to leave a lasting "impression"







HOWEVER DS was a TOTALLY different story...He was a little over 10lbs born at home... but like I said fat squishes...it was his 15" head that hurt like HE**!!!!! I didn't think he would ever come out.....as soon as he was out I yelled at dh that he was going for a vasectomy the NEXT day!!


----------



## shelleyd (Jul 24, 2005)

My first dd was 6lbs 110z. Labor was seven hours. I tore. Even after tearing I still didn't think it hurt that bad. I didn't really understand why anyone would want an epidural.

Then I had dd2. My labor was shorter, only 3 hrs and also shorter pushing stage. I didn't tear. But I thought I was going to rip in half. She was 8lbs 8oz, so almost 2lbs bigger than her sister. That 2lbs made a difference. I sure understood why women get epidurals after that!

I don't mean to scare you because really giving birth to both of my daughters was amazing. I wouldn't change a thing about either birth. But the answer to your questions in my case is YES.


----------



## jennybean0722 (Jun 19, 2006)

Yup. Same here. Head size and/or arm nearby. First son was 8 1/2 lbs with hand next to his head. Ow. 2.5 hours pushing, around 10 stitches. Second son was 10 lbs 4 oz, no hand next to head, came out with only two or three pushes. A snap!
Good luck!


----------



## Viola (Feb 1, 2002)

I honestly think some of the difference is due to a quick labor vs. a longer labor. I mean a 3 hour labor seems like it would be more painful with everything happening so quickly.


----------



## Murihiku (Oct 2, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Viola* 
I honestly think some of the difference is due to a quick labor vs. a longer labor. I mean a 3 hour labor seems like it would be more painful with everything happening so quickly.









: My first baby was 9lb with a six-hour labour and one hour of pushing. It felt like very hard work, but wasn't too painful.

My second baby (okay, 10lb, 10oz) was a four-and-a-half hour labour with I think about 15 minutes of pushing (or trying to avoid pushing!). It wasn't hard work at all, but it HURT. I do think it was the speed more than the size.


----------



## ani'smommy (Nov 29, 2005)

No way, my induced (at 40 wks for pre-e) 5lb 14oz baby was waaaaaaay harder than my 8lb 12oz baby that I had at home. #2 was a much faster labor, too.


----------



## cappuccinosmom (Dec 28, 2003)

lol. Nope.

I always







when people get pop-eyed over my babies sizes. Labor hurts because it's *labor*. Most of the pain is from the contractions of the uterus, which has nothing to do with the size of the baby. Sometimes it hurts more or less, but there are so many factors that play into it and the baby's actual size is at the *bottom* of that list.

My last two babies were 9 lb 15 oz and 10 lb 8 oz. The "smaller" one was a painless labor (not that it wasn't hard work though!), the bigger one hurt like heck, *but* when they're that big, 9 oz isn't that significant of a difference. They were both gigantic.







Both labors were about 4 hours. Both uncomplicated. I tore *less* with the birth of the bigger one.

Given that I have heard so many horror stories from women with much, much smaller babies, I really don't think it's size that makes the difference, since laboring with my two huge babies was manageable, even though it wasn't necessarily pleasant.


----------



## mntnmom (Sep 21, 2006)

Like a PP said, there are SO many factors. My induced, slightly early labor with my 7pd9oz dd, was MUCH more painful than my spontaneous labors with my sons who weighed over 9 pds.


----------



## texasnurse3 (Feb 19, 2009)

2nd babies, in general and regardless of size, come faster just because your body has done it before and a baby has been through there before. However, it's important to remember that every labor, just like every baby, is different and unique. Some hurt a lot and some don't hurt much, if at all.

Your position during labor and pushing, how often you change positions, the shape of your pelvis, and how stretchy or tight your perineum is will have an effect on how fast labor is.

Your mindset going into labor is going to have one of the biggest impacts on your labor. Lots of fear or a need to control labor could make it longer or more painful. Respect for the awesome power of labor and acceptance of the many different things that your body might want or need (that might be different from what your mind wants) could make it faster and less painful.

Like many of the other responses said, there are lots of things that influence how long labor takes or how it feels.

Best wishes!


----------



## the_lissa (Oct 30, 2004)

My second baby, 9lbs, 10 ozs, was a lot faster and easier birth than my first, who was 8 lbs, 9 ozs.


----------



## SublimeBirthGirl (Sep 9, 2005)

My 2nd was maybe half a pound bigger (we didn't weigh her til the next day; then she was 5 ounces bigger). My smaller baby took 28 hours to come out; my bigger one less than 4. I think there were many factors involved but I don't believe bigger babies hurt more or take longer on average.


----------



## angelpie545 (Feb 23, 2005)

My first was 9lbs 5oz and it hurt like nothing else, but she was also my first baby and I did a lot of things that were comforting for me (like laying down right before transition) that didn't exactly help things along with labor. I'm normally a small person (5"4 115-120lbs) so a 9lb baby was kind of a feat for me. Her head was large and had gotten stuck, so that resulted in a lot of pain. My next baby was 7lb 6oz and still hurt, but not nearly as bad. The only thing that was really painful with her was transition and the "ring of fire". Man that stung. I only pushed a couple of times with her, while with my first I was pushing for at least an hour.


----------



## jennyfah (Jul 20, 2006)

Pushing a person out of one's vagina hurts; I think size has less to do with it than a variety of other issues (position of the baby, speed of labor, interventions like artificial oxytocin, mother's emotional/psychological state, etc., etc.). As the mama of 9 lb.+ babies I get the whole "ooooh, that must have hurt" comment a lot, which IMO is just another odd cultural misconception about birth. Yes, sometimes labor is painful; sometimes it's not. Contractions and the stretching of the perineum often hurt, but lots of factors (like nuchal hands) certainly cause more issues than just the size of the babies.

When I get that comment, I always tell people that gravity helps those big babies come down and then I get weird looks. They usually don't have more comments after that.









I just want to give recognition, respect, well-wishes, empathy, and congratulations to ANYONE who births a baby, no matter the size . . . we don't get to choose what size babies we grow, so it's not like we should get special rewards based on size. It's hard work, and I honor the mamas of all sizes of babies! Our bodies are amazing.


----------



## kerikadi (Nov 22, 2001)

The labor didn't hurt more but the pushing did.

My biggest baby was 9/8 and she did hurt more than her 8/8 sister with a compound presentation.
My boys were 6/8 and 5/12 and pushing felt good, not painful.


----------



## onelilguysmommy (May 11, 2005)

nope, it doesnt. providers around, position, presentation, etc all factor into it. my 2nd was heavier but it didnt hurt to get him out. my first the doc ripped me with her hand and thought it was funny and then him coming out hurt as well.


----------



## AngelaB (Nov 20, 2001)

My 10 lb 2oz babe hurt the least but took the longest.
My 6lb 10ozer hurt the most. I think he was positioned a bit wonky though.
My last son was 8lb 12oz and came out in 2 hours. It was very intense.


----------



## mama in the forest (Apr 17, 2006)

My 13 pounder hurt less than all the others which were smaller...in fact, she didn't hurt at all. It was my 9 pounder that was the hardest (and smallest).


----------



## stacyann21 (Oct 21, 2006)

Bigger *heads* are more painful.


----------



## Full Heart (Apr 27, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *stacyann21* 
Bigger *heads* are more painful.

We could probably have another post about this and find experiences just as varying. My babies heads have ranged 13-14.5 inches. Haven't found smaller heads to be less painful. The smaller heads seem to mold less so it feels more bone on bone. While the bigger heads mold and all the skin wrinkles up, felt softer to me coming out. Position of the head and nuchal arms really made a difference for me though. And being dehydrated. That sucked.


----------



## donutmolly (Jun 9, 2005)

DD1 was 7lbs 15oz... DD2 was a full pound heavier, and I felt that birthing her was much less painful. I tore with DD1, and not at all with DD2. Both were in "ideal" positions. Both unmedicated, uninduced homebirths.

I really think that there are so many factors that influence our perception of pain that the size of the baby is really inconsequential. In my case, I believe that simply the fact that I was having my second birth and knew (somewhat) what it was going to be like and how to help myself rather than work against my body made the difference in not just my perception of pain, but actually my body's ability to birth.


----------



## boscopup (Jul 15, 2005)

Preemies don't have much fat, and fat is squishy and more comfortable than bone, so keep that in mind.









My first was a 29 weeker, weighing 3 lbs 13 oz. Labor was 2.5 hours total.
My second was a 37 weeker, weighing 7 lbs 4 oz. Labor was 5 hours total.

The second birth was WAAAAAAY less painful!!!!! First of all, I had the nice, easy, early labor contractions that felt like AF cramps. Not a big deal at all. It was only like the last 1.5 hours that got more intense, and I still didn't even really notice transition. With #1, I'd been thinking "I can't do this anymore" when transition hit. With #2, I was thinking "I hope this is over soon.", but I wasn't at the "I can't do this anymore" stage.







Then my body started to push and it took me by surprise! Pushing took a little longer, BUT since I was out of hospital, I just let my body do the work and it was actually easier than the hospital preemie birth with the purple pushing (#1 was out in 3 pushes). I think I pushed for 20-30 minutes with #2, but don't know how many pushes it was. I remember grabbing a drink, sniffing some O2, and having a nice long break between pushes. It was nice.

Also, the longer labor was better for me. 5 hours was just right. I had time to think about being in labor and get used to the idea, ya know? 2.5 hours was a bit fast. I'm a bit freaked about labor length right now, because my mom's labors were 5 hours, 2.5 hours, and then 1.5 hours (me). I did mine in a different order, but I'm scared it will be 1.5 hours this time.







I'd much rather have another 5 hour labor!


----------



## Kidzaplenty (Jun 17, 2006)

It has not been my experience that bigger babies hurt worse. And I have had some large babies.


----------



## Justmee (Jun 6, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *BabyMommee* 
Yes, I'm sure this sounds like a completely dumb question, but I just wanted to hear from someone that has had both a small baby and a bigger baby - does it hurt ALOT more? Does it take ALOT longer?

My son was born premature (at 33 weeks) so he was 4 pounds 11.5 ounces. My entire labor (from the time I woke up that morning) was 3 hours. I pushed for 15 minutes. Don't get me wrong, it hurt like crazy and it was the hardest thing I've ever done, but now ... I'm going to do everything I possible can to make sure this baby cooks alot longer. Do I need to expect a much longer harder labor?

My twins were 4lbs 1oz & 4lbs 8oz. Rivka was 7lbs 13oz and Avraham Tzvi was 8lbs 10oz. Avraham Tzvi was the quickest labor. I never pushed more than a couple of times with any of them.

Good luck cooking baby a LOOOONG time (well not to 50 weeks







)


----------

