I've been thinking about this whole EDD (expected delivery date) business. How the hell can you tell when a baby is going to be born? Quite simply, you can't. You can use statistics gathered by people over the years to hazard a guess, but there really is no dead certain way of knowing when a baby will be born.
When I first visited the doctor, based on my LMP (last menstrual cycle), he advised me my EDD would be 30th August 2009. The midwife said the same at my booking session. Then when I went for my 12 week scan I was told my EDD was actually 24th August 2009, a whole week before the one based on my LMP dates. I don't quite know how they got the original date other than it's exactly 9 calendar months after the 1st day of my LMP which isn't how it's calculated anyway!
 |
| Franz Karl Naegele |
What with it being my EDD today I've been doing a bit of reading about the whole EDD prediction thing and I've come up with the following. A chap called Franz Karl Naegele came up with Naegele's Rule which is a calculation to use for estimating delivery dates. It assumes that the menstrual cycles of the woman in question are regular, occur every 28 days with ovulation happening on the 14th day of each cycle. In my case my menstrual cycles are always 26 days and ovulation occurs on day 13. They were natural cycles, i.e.: not "helped" by the contraceptive pill, another assumption made by Naegele's Rule. The basic calculation is: 1st day of LMP + 280 days = EDD. So, based on the standard Naegele's Rule calculation, my EDD would be 6th September 2009, a week after the original EDD given to me and a whopping 13 days after the dating scan EDD. Using the EDD calculator on Babycentre.co.uk which seems to use Naegele's Rule (adjusting my cycle to 26 days), the EDD I get is 4th September 2009.
This new found information throws mixed emotions my way. Initially I am confused as to why this calculation wasn't used in the first place? I wasn't even asked if my menses were regular. Actually, I'm still confused, but not in the least bit surprised. I understand that not everyone has a regular cycle and that not everyone knows when they ovulate, but I do!
I'm a bit peeved at the medical profession for relying on images of a foetus at approximately 12 weeks old to decide when its going to be born. How on earth is that accurate?? I wonder how many babies are induced before they're ready to be born? Fair enough if the baby is showing signs of distress, but inducing for the sake of it?
I've said from the beginning that I think the Wiggler will be early. S/he can't be early now by medical estimation, but might be early by the standard 9 months + 7 days Naegele's Rule calculation. The midwife I saw at my last appointment said that when babies are "overdue" they aren't allowed to be more than 12 days so; what usually happens is the mother is booked in for induction on day 12 and on day 11 the baby is born. If I look at the calendar I see that 12 days over my medical EDD is 5th September and that day 11 is none other than 4th September. How funny would it be if the Wiggler was actually born on 4th September?!
I know that I do not want to be induced and I am prepared to argue to stay at home. One of my NCT ladies has a friend who went 17 days over her medical EDD and still had a home birth. This gives me hope! As long as the Wiggler is OK and not showing signs of distress, I don't see why I should have to go to hospital because my EDD was calculated incorrectly.
I think I understand why everyone's been telling me I look so well considering how far along I am - it's because I'm not as far along as originally thought. At least the pool isn't due to be returned until 8th September!
I was taking the pill on and off when I fell pregnant, and as a result, I had no idea when my last period had been, so the medical professionals just picked a date out of the air for my due date.
ReplyDeleteWe knew (due to unfortunate circumstances) exactly when Georgia was conceived.
I had a membrane sweep on my 'due date' and the following day I went into labour.
Georgia was born nearly two weeks late by our calculations, but only two days by theirs. Our thoughts were back up, the midwife reckoned, by the fact that Georgia had very long finger nails.
They can't actually force you to be induced, and personally I'd hold on for as long as possible to get the birth you want, but obviously after a certain amount of time it becomes dangerous to both you and baby to leave it to nature.
Have you considered a membrane sweep? It certinly did the trick for me!
I've just been to see the midwife and she's got to book me a consultant appointment so that I can be monitored!
ReplyDeleteI know the risks of IUFD and will most likely have a membrane sweep on 3rd September which is what she suggested (that'll be term + 10 by their calculations).
When you say "their date" do you mean dating scan date? How did you work out your own date?
At the end of the day I want the Wiggler to come when s/he is ready as s/he'll be doing some important development right about now. I'd much rather give birth at home as planned, but if I have to be induced then I suppose will be.
Unfortunately - babies come when they want to come. Jack was 10 days late and he did come on his own -without inducing. We were set to induce June 14, but Jack had his own idea and I went into labor June 12, didn't have him until the 13th. It's a blessing and such an honor to be a part of don't you think? Good luck and can't wait to hear the news of the new Wiggler!!
ReplyDelete