| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
mamanee 
Senior Member
Joined: 01 January 1900
Location: Hamilton
Points: 2244
|
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote  Reply
 Topic: Size of baby - different father
Posted: 05 May 2009 at 2:28pm |
|
I don't know what to expect in regards to how big this baby is going to be, but I'm leaning towards thinking it's going to be huge.
Sam was 9lb 1oz and 56 CM long. I'm 5'6 and although I'm overweight I'm probably average build underneath. Sam's dad is 5'10 and the same, overweight but not huge. I was 7lb 4oz at birth and he was 9lb 4oz at birth.
My new partner is 6'4 and over 130KG and broke the record at the North Shore hospital in 1982 for being 64CM LONG!! And also around about the 11lb mark.
Because Sam was breech I had a c-section, but chances are this baby won't be breech and there will be no other medical reason why I can't have it naturally.
Am I just being silly, or do you think I'm going to give birth to a 6 month old baby?!
|
 |
|
Sponsored Links
|
|
|
T_Rex
Senior Member
Joined: 07 March 2007
Location: PN
Points: 2896
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 05 May 2009 at 2:46pm |
You may well have a slightly bigger baby - BUT lucky for you, there is this wonderful thing called maternal constraint, which basically means that the mother's body will restrict the growth of the fetus to a level that she can handle. And, it may well be a girl baby, which are generally a bit smaller than boys too. You'll be fine 
Just if you are interested, maternal constraint was first shown in horses, where they mated shetland ponies with I think clydesdales or similar. The purebred clydesdale foals were biggest, followed by the crossbred foals born from clydesdale mares (with shetland dad), and the crossbred foals born to shetland mares (with clydesdale dads) were tiny just like the purebred shetland foals. So the little mares were preventing the foals growing too big for them - clever eh?
This has been shown in several species since then too.
Disclaimer: I know we aren't horses, but its a nice illustration of maternal constraint. I mean no offence by the comparison
|
|
|
|
angel4
Senior Member
Joined: 06 May 2008
Points: 1101
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 05 May 2009 at 2:50pm |
|
dont worry too much about it hun. My son was born prem (4wks early) and he was 8pound 1. Which i know isnt that big but its HUGE for a baby that early. your body knows what its doing. My midwife said that if id given birth at full term henry would have been close to 11pounds. She also said that you can have an very easy birth with a large baby and a very hard birth with a tiny baby. The size isnt all that important. Though in saying that i wil probably still be very nervous if this bub goes too close to full term or god forbid overdue lol.
Oh another thing dont get a scan to tell you how big bubs is because they can be very wrong!!!
Sorry for the long post. Enjoy your pregnancy and try not to worry
|
|
mamanee
Senior Member
Joined: 01 January 1900
Location: Hamilton
Points: 2244
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 05 May 2009 at 2:50pm |
Ooooo thank you for that, makes me feel better!
And no, no offence taken, good to know that nature will be there to help me out.
I don't know how much bigger Sam would have gotten had I have gone overdue though, as he was born two days early.
Oh well, guess i'll find out at the end! *thinking pink too* 
|
|
MrsMojo
Senior Member
Joined: 18 March 2008
Location: Wellington
Points: 8202
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 05 May 2009 at 2:57pm |
T_Rex that's fascinating!
Out of interest my mum is very little (not quite 5ft) and I was the smallest of her 4 babies at 6lb10 but I was also her hardest labour. My sis was the biggest of her babies (closer to 9lb) and a longer labour but by far the easiest.
|
|
|
|
freckle
Senior Member
Joined: 03 December 2008
Points: 4773
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 05 May 2009 at 9:39pm |
|
I have had two girls to two different dads... they were 8:11 and 8:10 respectively... DD2 has a much bigger dad who was also a much bigger baby than DD1 and it made no difference... infact she was slightly smaller... That maternal constraint thingy sounds very interesting T_Rex and seems to make sense in my situation....
|
|
mum to 3 lovely girls :D
|
|
Babe
Senior Member
Joined: 21 May 2007
Location: New Zealand
Points: 2936
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 06 May 2009 at 1:29pm |
Jake was just under 10 pound and, except for his shoulder getting stuck  , he was a really easy birth!! I'm hoping for another big baby next time, we have 9 pound + babies in my family and they're all really placid, happy tots.
I'm 5"7 (and the shortest in my family!) and both my ex and DP are 6"+
Very interesting about the maternal constraint I remember studying it in Biology and using our sheep as case studies lol not comparing us to sheep of course!!
|
|
|
|
Kels
Senior Member
Joined: 01 January 1900
Location: Lower Hutt
Points: 11520
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 16 May 2009 at 8:48am |
My DD was 10lbs and I had emer C/s as she got stuck amongst other things. Like yourself I was freaking out thinking my next one was going to be big/bigger and I had a different partner who was over 130kg. Turns out the 2 kids we had were 8lb 6oz and 7lbs 4oz. My boy was the smallest of them all lol
|
|
THEDH
Newbie
Joined: 30 April 2007
Location: North Shore
Points: 3
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 16 May 2009 at 7:38pm |
I think you'll be fine. Being part of the same family I don't think there is any rule on where the weight comes from. I was 10lb 6oz and my mum (Dans side of the family) is 5' 6ish and my dad's side are all over 6' 2". Mandy is 5'2" or something and Oliver was 7lb 15. so the male Gummer or my side had no contribution to his weight.
But holy crap I did't know Dan was that big comin out. I thought my mum had it bad. Poor Auntie.
Take care.
|
|
Size of baby - different father
