So when exactly is this baby due?
Tell someone you're pregnant, and the first question is usually "When is it due?". When we asked my GP about this, he reminded us of the statistics: only something like 5% of babies are born on their due date. We recognise this. But we needled him for a date because we knew everyone would ask. Besides, we work well to deadline!
What we didn't fully expect was just how confusing this would get...
By the standard method of determining a baby's due date (by something referred to, in abbreviation, as "LMP", which I might be tempted to redefine as "Lazy Medical Professionals"), this baby is due October 15, 2006. (This is the date my GP's resident insists on using, and in fact has more than once climbed up on her soapbox to lecture me on how important it is.) By another method (as in, the one which prompts me to clear my throat, blush, and say, "We were there, we know!"), the due date is October 21, 2006. Nearly a week's difference.
We've also got a bunch in between these two extremes. When we first asked my GP for a due date, and he had reminded us of statistical probabilities (and thereby warmed the cockles of Werner's econometrician heart!), he split the difference between the two extremes (sort-of), and settled on October 17.
Werner and I looked at each other and giggled.
Why? Well, a baby arriving on October 17 would be the best birthday present I could probably ever receive. (Would also mean, as I like to tease Werner, that he could get out of $200 birthday dinners, at least for the next 15-20 years or so.)
And there are also the dates from the aptly-named dating ultrasound. As I've already written, at the March 4th ultrasound the sonographer dated the baby at 7 weeks and 2 days, which would make for a due date of October 19. (Might I point out that this is closer to 'our' date of October 21 than it is to the LMP date of October 15?) That's what we were told, anyway. The resident has told us, however, that the official report from that ultrasound dated das kleine Bärchen at 7 weeks and 3 days, which sets the due date at October 18. The median date.
Anyway, we've informed the resident that she can consider the baby to be due on October 15, if it makes her happy, but that we're going to tell everyone October 17, because that was the first 'official' date we were given. (Never mind the sentimental connection.) She didn't seem to appreciate that very much... So I reminded her that no matter how many of us gathered about to debate the date, it is completely up to the baby to decide!
So there you have it. If you ask us when the baby is due, we'll say October 17, 2006. Just don't ask the resident for her opinion!
(Oh, and of course I've used the wrong phrase all through this treatise... Instead of 'due date', I should have been writing 'estimated date of delivery', or EDD. I'm sure I've stepped on some medical toes with that one!)
What we didn't fully expect was just how confusing this would get...
By the standard method of determining a baby's due date (by something referred to, in abbreviation, as "LMP", which I might be tempted to redefine as "Lazy Medical Professionals"), this baby is due October 15, 2006. (This is the date my GP's resident insists on using, and in fact has more than once climbed up on her soapbox to lecture me on how important it is.) By another method (as in, the one which prompts me to clear my throat, blush, and say, "We were there, we know!"), the due date is October 21, 2006. Nearly a week's difference.
We've also got a bunch in between these two extremes. When we first asked my GP for a due date, and he had reminded us of statistical probabilities (and thereby warmed the cockles of Werner's econometrician heart!), he split the difference between the two extremes (sort-of), and settled on October 17.
Werner and I looked at each other and giggled.
Why? Well, a baby arriving on October 17 would be the best birthday present I could probably ever receive. (Would also mean, as I like to tease Werner, that he could get out of $200 birthday dinners, at least for the next 15-20 years or so.)
And there are also the dates from the aptly-named dating ultrasound. As I've already written, at the March 4th ultrasound the sonographer dated the baby at 7 weeks and 2 days, which would make for a due date of October 19. (Might I point out that this is closer to 'our' date of October 21 than it is to the LMP date of October 15?) That's what we were told, anyway. The resident has told us, however, that the official report from that ultrasound dated das kleine Bärchen at 7 weeks and 3 days, which sets the due date at October 18. The median date.
Anyway, we've informed the resident that she can consider the baby to be due on October 15, if it makes her happy, but that we're going to tell everyone October 17, because that was the first 'official' date we were given. (Never mind the sentimental connection.) She didn't seem to appreciate that very much... So I reminded her that no matter how many of us gathered about to debate the date, it is completely up to the baby to decide!
So there you have it. If you ask us when the baby is due, we'll say October 17, 2006. Just don't ask the resident for her opinion!
(Oh, and of course I've used the wrong phrase all through this treatise... Instead of 'due date', I should have been writing 'estimated date of delivery', or EDD. I'm sure I've stepped on some medical toes with that one!)
posted by Melanie A at 12:25 p.m.
1 Comments:
Hi - - - as you can tell, I'm kind of surfing through your blog! My doctor insisted that our due date was May 17, based on LMP, with Alec, and I knew, based on exhaustive fertility tracking and, ahem, what I was there for, that the baby was due on May 21, and probably would come a day or two later. But, as luck would have it, he came on her due date. Exactly. She gloated, but I know it was really to do with the big swim and dance-a-thon I had with Joffre on the 16th. They come when they're ready!!
Post a Comment
<< Home