Sep 022011

“There’s been a new study released that ultrasounds can be inaccurate for dating. You could be TWO WHOLE WEEKS more pregnant than you thought!” – OB suggesting an induction at 39 weeks.

Share Button
 September 2, 2011  Due Date, OB, Ultrasound  Add comments

  28 Responses to “"…You Could Be Two Whole Weeks More Pregnant Than You Thought!"”

  1. Or two weeks less pregnant.

  2. Oh, *that’s* a new one.

    Admitting u/s inacurracy in order to manipulate a patient into early induction.

    Good one, doc.

  3. That’s fine. my MIL went FOUR WHOLE WEEKS refusing inductions with DH :-D and guess what?! THEY BOTH SURVIVED. AND was ALL NATURAL!
    i know, i know. it’s a miracle, doc :-P

  4. funny how all of a sudden the U/S is not accurate, but it’s accurate when they’re telling a mama the baby is too big to be born vaginally.

  5. “Regardless of the dates, doc, why don’t we let my body decide when the time is right?”

  6. It’s not a new study.
    So then why did you do the dating ultrasound?
    If I’m sure of my conception/ovulation/LMP dates is that good enough, or is research showing something about that, too?
    I could also be 2 WHOLE WEEKS LESS PREGNANT which makes my baby just barely ready to face the outside world.
    “Two whole weeks more pregnant” is not a medical indication for induction.
    Induction carries a whole list of its own risks, both medical and emotional, both for me and the baby.
    So tell me, why are we rushing things here?

  7. Didn’t we have Dr. F in here one time telling us how he could predict due date so accurately based on ultrasound?

  8. 1: That’s not a new study, doc — unless you’re caught in a time warp from 1982. 2: According to the ACOG, “overdue” isn’t till AFTER 42 weeks, so I’ve still got at least a week before any risks of being overdue *start* to increase — you can talk to me *then,* k?. 3: Why assume that the inaccuracy only works in one direction? I could me 37 weeks pregnant! 4: Since you apparently did bother to read a medical journal once in a while, it probably also mentioned that U/S dating is very accurate when done before 10 weeks. So how’s about we look at my earliest U/S, instead of you changing my date every time you start to get antsy?

  9. Or 2 weeks less…? And omg, ultrasounds are inaccurate! Such shocking NEW info. *barf*

  10. So everything is inaccurate. My chart is inaccurate because you don’t believe it works. My LMP is inaccurate because it doesn’t give precise information about when I ovulated. My ultrasound is inaccurate because it could be two weeks off.

    The only one who seems to know what’s going on here is the baby, so let’s let the baby decide when it’s time to be born, Doctor When, since you admit right now that YOU don’t know when that time is.

    Oh, and I’m fascinated by studies. Can you give me a copy of this study to read while I’m going dangerously overdue? Thanks. :-)

  11. This makes me so grateful for my OB. When I had my first prenatal appointment, she said, “This is your estimated due date, based on your LMP and the ultrasound we did today. You could give birth 2 weeks before that date, or 2 weeks after, so don’t get too attached to that date. We’ll only worry if your baby starts showing signs of distress.”

  12. I’m sorry but can I just say:
    Ignore that man. In fact run away from him very fast.

  13. OK, so I could be 41 weeks instead of 39. You’re point, Doc?


  15. You, sir or madam, are a complete dumbass. And you’re fired.

  16. Great! I’d like to read the study. I’ll have to order it. Don’t worry, it should be here in 2 weeks…

  17. *face palm*

    When my cousin was pregnant they were absolutely POSITIVE about her due date, given the ultrasound. She went a week and a half earlier than her supposed due date and the baby was born extremely wrinkly, which is apparently a sign that you’re well past 9 months. Afterward they admitted that she was almost a month further along than they’d predicted. Nice reliance on inaccurate technology. :P

  18. See, the the direction this is going scares me. I feel like by the time I get preggo, they’ll be wanting to rip a baby out of me by 35 weeks at the latest. I’m going to have to go on the lam, aren’t I?

  19. …But it’s far more likely that you are 2 weeks *less* pregnant, since most people don’t ovulate while they are still menstrating… Just sayin.

  20. OP here (can’t pink from my phone)

    This is slightly mis-quoted, the OB was suggesting repeat c-section when I told her I would wait as long as it took for my VBAC. Her attitude was “well it’s going to fail anyway, so you might as well save your energy and book in now” using 2 whole weeks as an excuse, ignoring my LMP and ovulation dates also gave me the same edd.

    I asked if that 2 week margin of error went the other way and was it possible I was only 37 weeks. “Oh no, your fundal height and descent station are far more consistent with 39 weeks!” She abruptly ended the appointment after I smiled and said “so my original due date is pretty accurate then?”

    Ironically Liam was born by VBAC exactly 2 weeks later!

  21. It works both ways Dr. Dumbass!

  22. How is that possible?

Leave a Reply