Reply
♥MomToSilas+1♥ Due December 9; 1 child; ., IL, United States 11500 posts
22nd Mar '13

It can influence it. I was 10lbs 14oz at birth. BD was 6lbs 15oz. DS was 9lbs 15oz.

BastiansMommy 1 child; Lacey, WA, United States 2433 posts
22nd Mar '13
Quoting Whitnie Marie:" That's what I like to hear! "

haha I was relived when I found out...though I had a c-section so I didn't have to push him out anyway. But still glad he wasn't the 10lb baby my doctor expected lol

I'm me 4 kids; Kentucky 3109 posts
22nd Mar '13
Quoting kate & tilly:" My ob told me the dad's size at birth doesn't make much of a difference in your child's birthweight. ... [snip!] ... you physically cannot birth without a medical condition. He was right for me. I was 6 lbs 3 oz at birth and dd was 6 lbs 5 oz."


not nessicerally. Some women have a tiny frame and the baby's head will not pass under mom's pubic bone. Then they have to have a c-section. It's called



cephalopelvic disproportion.

Boobo&bugs 2 kids; Simpsonville, South Carolina 7725 posts
22nd Mar '13

<blockquote><b>Quoting I'm me:</b>" not nessicerally. Some women have a tiny frame and the baby's head will not pass under mom's pubic bone. Then they have to have a c-section. It's called cephalopelvic disproportion. "</blockquote>




Yes and that would be a medical condition. That's why I said theoretically.

NICKEL☮POLIS 2 kids; Ontario 6268 posts
22nd Mar '13
Quoting Whitnie Marie:" I'm 8 weeks pregnant with my first and I'm sure I'm going to have tons of stupid questions. I apologize ... [snip!] ... a 9 pound baby. Does this increase my chances of having a larger baby?? Or does it have absolutely nothing to do with that? "



I don't think it has anything to do with it.
SO weighed 8lb 13oz, I weighed 8lbs 5.5oz and DD weighed 6lbs 10.9oz

Whitnie Marie Due October 28; North Carolina 197 posts
22nd Mar '13

I plan to eat super healthy and not go crazy so I'm hoping that helps out. Even though SO was 13 pounds his Mom only gained 30lbs. You'd think she would have gained 60 or something. Haha.

I'm me 4 kids; Kentucky 3109 posts
22nd Mar '13
Quoting kate & tilly:" <blockquote><b>Quoting I'm me:</b>" not nessicerally. Some women have a tiny frame ... [snip!] ... disproportion. "</blockquote> Yes and that would be a medical condition. That's why I said theoretically."


there is nothing medically wrong with the mother or the child.

my kids...my life!! Due October 5 (boy); 20 kids; Texas 35 posts
22nd Mar '13

I work for an Ob Gyn office I've seen alot and I personally have had 5 of my own. My DH was almost 11 lbs and I was close to 8 lbs, but my biggest child was only 6.4 (post pregnancy I go back to@ 106 lbs and i'm 5 ft tall) so it depends on your body, also depends on factors of gestational diabetes and so on. Just because y'all were big babies doesn't mean you will have a big baby. :)

Celeste Ariel Romero Due November 7 (twins); 1 child; Tucson, Arizona 362 posts
22nd Mar '13

I was 8lb 5oz SO was 7lb something. My DD was 8lb 1oz

I'm me 4 kids; Kentucky 3109 posts
22nd Mar '13
Quoting Whitnie Marie:" I plan to eat super healthy and not go crazy so I'm hoping that helps out. Even though SO was 13 pounds his Mom only gained 30lbs. You'd think she would have gained 60 or something. Haha. "


I gained 18 lbs with my oldest my SIL gained 45lbs her baby only weighed 2oz more.

Boobo&bugs 2 kids; Simpsonville, South Carolina 7725 posts
22nd Mar '13

<blockquote><b>Quoting I'm me:</b>" there is nothing medically wrong with the mother or the child."</blockquote>




Having a termed "medical condition" doesn't mean there is anything wrong for instance dd has a "medical condition" called familial macrocephaly. There is not anything wrong with her. It's still noted as a "medical condition" in her charts. It's just that a very small percentage of people out of the general population have the same thing she does.

I'm me 4 kids; Kentucky 3109 posts
22nd Mar '13
Quoting kate & tilly:" <blockquote><b>Quoting I'm me:</b>" there is nothing medically wrong with the mother ... [snip!] ... in her charts. It's just that a very small percentage of people out of the general population have the same thing she does."


what I was meaning is that mother could birth a smaller baby or a different mother could birth that size baby.
macrencephaly is an abnormality and a medical condition because the child's head is larger than average. If the mother's pelvic outlet could be on the small side of "normal" and the child's head on the upper side of "normal" they neither have a medical condition but the size discrepancy causes a problem.

1 child; Houston, Texas 850 posts
22nd Mar '13

You don't want a small unhealthy baby. For your vag's sake? Smh.

I'm me 4 kids; Kentucky 3109 posts
22nd Mar '13
Quoting ☆ohemgee☆:" You don't want a small unhealthy baby. For your vag's sake? Smh."


I don't know anyone who would chose to birth a 13lb baby instead of an 7-8lb baby.

A, E & W's mommy 4 kids; 1 angel baby; Bulgaria 16502 posts
22nd Mar '13

<blockquote><b>Quoting I'm me:</b>" there is nothing medically wrong with the mother or the child."</blockquote>



Yes there is something medically wrong with the mother with that condition, to say its just that her pelvis is disproportionately small is an oversimplification, with that condition the mothers pelvis will not (unlike how women are supposed to) expand enough to allow for delivery. My grandmother had that condition and consequently her first baby died during delivery, so her next baby, my dad, was a section.