# Super Active Baby = Early delivery?



## MissMommyNiceNice (May 1, 2007)

Does anyone with a super active baby wonder about early delivery? My ds was not like this at all. I mean he moved around, but this baby is like rolling around so that my whole stomach moves & ripples. I get feet in the lungs, jabs to the cervix, full on karate kicks to the kidneys! And the hiccups have started (which of course I







) but it's like 4 times a day!

All this movement has me wondering if maybe my dates are off and if this one might come out fighting early!


----------



## AllyRae (Dec 10, 2003)

Uh, no, not for me. My most active baby was my 41 weeker. My least active one was my 36 weeker (and even though she was a planned 36 weeker, I actually started with regular contractions the night of the c-section, so she was coming that day whether she wanted to or not. And she was the one that barely moved in utero even though she was perfectly healthy)


----------



## Peony (Nov 27, 2003)

Same here. My most active out (out of 3) was the one that decided to stay inside forever.







The girls both came at 38 weeks, but DS couldn't follow in their footsteps, more like 41 weeks with him. And on a side note, for all the moving that DS did inside, he is the most mellowest baby ever. Seriously, I could have a few more kids if they were all this laid back!


----------



## notneb (Aug 31, 2006)

DS was ridiculously active and was 41 weeks by ultrasound estimate and 43 weeks by my dates. He is still a little maelstrom of activity.







:


----------



## MissMommyNiceNice (May 1, 2007)

You girls aren't being very comforting!









I squeal at least once a day b/c of the pain/shock/surprise of the big movements coming from this little alien person living inside me. With DS, it was rare that I was surprised by the movement. Not so with this one!


----------



## JorgieGirl (May 13, 2006)

My dd was painfully active and she was 4 days early. But my newphew was even more so, to the point where my sister's belly was literally bruised on the outside. Visibly bruised. He was 41.3. OUchies.


----------



## ears73 (Oct 28, 2009)

well bummer - I was thinking the same thing - that perhaps an active lil monkey would want to be born sooner.... darn, it looks like the odds are that I'm cooking another late one. Supposedly due 12.7, I am counting on the forces of the full moon on the 2nd to speed things up for me. The 3rd would be my date of choice, assuming I had a vote!


----------



## coldandsleepy (Aug 5, 2008)

My son was SUPER active in the womb and came 8 days after his EDD. And we're entirely sure of date of conception, so!

Sorry to add another disappointing data point.


----------



## DCMama01 (Aug 28, 2009)

So I guess I can expect my baby to come at 42 weeks based on this thread. LMAO


----------



## MissMommyNiceNice (May 1, 2007)

Jeez. Add to it my thread last week about how I thought my due date was the 9th of January, but my MW had the 23rd written down. Ugh.


----------



## sunshadow (May 17, 2009)

My daughter was insanely active and she came 3 weeks early. This guy is very mellow... we will see!


----------



## Sk8ermaiden (Feb 13, 2008)

Mine was super active and 42 weeks!


----------



## Mizelenius (Mar 22, 2003)

Nope! This is baby #4, my MOST active, and I am at least a week past where I would have been with my other girls, who would have been born by now!


----------



## crunchy_mama (Oct 11, 2004)

Add me to the later crowd as well. This baby is very active and tomorrow is my due date, w/ no labor in site- the other 2 were 38.3 and 39.2.


----------



## Mizelenius (Mar 22, 2003)

Thinking about this . . .I always had the experience that babies get quiet before birth. Last week I was pretty sure the 5 min. apart cx were going to lead to something, and nope. One thing that made me 2nd guess it was the fact that the baby was TOO active that night, even with cx.

She has been much, much quieter this week (and I have to go in for weekly non-stress tests since I am 36-- so I know she is fine) and that gives me hope labor is going to be soon.

I thought, maybe a more active baby takes longer to "settle" so stays inside longer! Or maybe there is no correlation!


----------



## noobmom (Jan 19, 2008)

My active baby was 41 weeks. This one is active too, maybe more so, and I'm planning on her being post due date.

I wonder, in part, since smaller babies = more room to move around = more active babies, that active babies tend to "cook" a little longer. Either because they need to grow a little more from moving around so much or because they are smaller to begin with so our bodies don't decide to birth them as soon (until they put on enough weight).

My DS was only 7 lbs 12 oz when he was born, so I'm glad he stayed inside for an extra week!


----------



## JennTheMomma (Jun 19, 2008)

Not for me. My son was constantly moving and he was a 41 weeker.


----------



## hookahgirl (May 22, 2005)

No, mine was super active but came on his "due date". ALthough I will say he is still super active now LOL


----------



## olien (Apr 21, 2008)

My DS was a constant mover & he was 40 wks & 2 days


----------



## emnic77 (Sep 12, 2009)

Both my kids were throwing a rave in there, insanely active for offensively long periods of time.








One was 10 days late, the other was 8 days late.


----------



## beetkvass (May 20, 2009)

My oldest was my most active and I went into labor with him on his due date. All the rest have come earlier and been less active.


----------



## gardenmommy (Nov 23, 2001)

My most active babies have been in the longest. And as to the point raised earlier about smaller babies=more room to be active, I don't buy that, either. My #4 was super busy, and my biggest one by almost a full pound. This one is proving to be quite active, too. I've been feeling movement since about 12 weeks.


----------



## shakenbake (Nov 19, 2008)

ill let u know when this CRAZY active kiddo comes shes not "due" for 9 days


----------



## Terrilein (Jan 9, 2007)

My dd was crazy active and was born a few days early. However, she had neonatal sepsis, cause unknown, and she either came early due to her illness or maybe due to all the interventions from her 3-day birth.


----------



## babymkes3 (Oct 11, 2009)

My dd was sooo super active i still swear she had a 3 ring circus going on in there, and she was born the day before my due date. Hope that gives you a little hope


----------



## laughingfox (Dec 13, 2005)

My daughter was very active, and she was 16 days late. Probably not what you wanted to hear, sorry!


----------



## DCMama01 (Aug 28, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *DCMama01* 
So I guess I can expect my baby to come at 42 weeks based on this thread. LMAO

Update: Well, as you can see from my siggie, baby came two weeks early!


----------

