scan
2007-07-27 12:57:04
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
if the doctor had given me a due date based on my last period i would be due about 5 weeks earlier than i already am!which is a big difference!i was sent for an early scan to find out how far gone i was as i told them when my last period was but also told them i had lost a good friend after that and they thought there was a possibility i had missed a period due to stress and upset.turns out they were right i had.
i went for the first scan and was between 4-5 weeks...if they had gone off my last period i would have been 9-10 weeks!big difference at that stage!!then went for a second scan and was 11 weeks 2 days which matched the first scan within a week.
they are the professionals and especially in the first trimester scans are meant to be accurate to within the week...
i am just one example of a case where scans are important to figure out a due date.periods cant always be accurate for everyone to go off and not all women ovulate exactly 14 days after the first day of their period...it depends on the length of your cycle and your body - everyones different!
2007-07-27 06:59:11
·
answer #2
·
answered by jess7 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I would go with the scan I was told edd 2nd jan according to last period then 23rd occording to estimated ovulation date, then 19 of jan at a 10 week scan then finally at the 13 weeks scan was giving the 20th of jan .. after 12 weeks though they go with that date for your pregnancy but it doens't really matter hardly any give birth on there due date..
congrats!!!
2007-07-27 06:04:47
·
answer #3
·
answered by mum 2 Cameron and Ewan 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
either could be correct. They never could decide with my cousin when her due date was supposed to be. first July 13 then July 27 then July 20. She didn't have the baby on any of those days. My due date lined up correctly with my period until I was 26 weeks. I was in a car accident that made my girl two weeks behind gestational age. Ultrasound suddenly said she was due 2 weeks after her due date (they knew not to trust it since it had lined up previous to that) She was born 3 weeks before her due date. It's why in Lady and The Tramp Jim Dear just circled the whole month his wife was due in. It's probably safest to assume it's the earlier date and then don't worry about not delivering by then. My cousin's date continued to change right up to a couple weeks before she delivered. So you might get new dates as time goes on. Good luck.
2007-07-27 05:40:22
·
answer #4
·
answered by fractaljf 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I would go by the first day of your last period. I had been ttc for years, so I KNEW when I got pregnant... down to the day, May 11. When I went in to see the doc he changed my due date 3 times because of the measurements of my little one. I told him I knew the day I conceived but he wouldnt really listen to me. I knew my due date would be Jan 31, but he finally stopped at Feb 8. I told him that all women on both sides of my family were born at 5lbs or less (I have a feeling its going to be a girl)... so I might just be blessed with delivering a small kid. Again he didnt really take that into consideration. Needless to say I have a new doc now. But all I can say is... your little one will come when its ready.
2007-07-27 05:48:44
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
They had to date my last pregnancy by u/s because I had become pregnant while breastfeeding and there was no lmp to determine possible conception date. The u/s measured my little guy and they gave me the due date of December 1, 2005 and I went in to labor on December 1 at roughly 1:30 in the afternoon, he was born the next morning. There were 3 u/s done and they were all accurate as far as measurements and dates. I would go by the u/s. Best wishes :)
2007-07-27 05:47:38
·
answer #6
·
answered by ? 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
Yes, I went to the doctor for the first time and using my last period i was due the 19 of Dec. But just a week or so ago i went to get an ultra sound. And my due date changed to the 11. It just means that the baby is growing faster, and is farther along in development then your body is using your last period. Good Luck!!!
2007-07-27 05:28:39
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Only 5% of women deliver their children on the due date. The more accurate one should be the ultrasound because it is going on the development of the fetus. Not all women ovulate 14 days after their period begins and so the calendar is only a guess as to what the day you concieved might be.
2007-07-27 05:31:44
·
answer #8
·
answered by twinkie.2006 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
found this on the net for you that describes how they work theses dates out. i`d go for the second as they are pretty accurate but do be warned - babies arrive when they want too! congratulations & good luck with your pregnancy!
"Measurements of your baby's head circumference (HC) and diameter (biparietal diameter or BPD -- see image, below) are taken, along with the abdominal circumference (AC) and femur or thigh bone (FL), to date the pregnancy and to make sure your baby is growing normally. If there is more than seven days' difference between your scan dates and your dates according to your last monthly period (LMP) in the second trimester, the scan dates will be used from now on."
2007-07-27 05:47:50
·
answer #9
·
answered by helen t 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
ultrasound scans go on the size of your baby, the doctor can give you a due date but it is only an estimate, hence why you are told you can go two weeks either side of the date given to you,
congrats by the way... hope all goes well for you
2007-07-27 05:28:54
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
the ultasound goes on the measurements of the unborn child which can tell you how old the child is. it is more accurate than edd's through Lmp's. the 8th jan will be your offical due date. although its not incredably accurate. your baby can be born 2 weeks either side of this date
2007-07-27 05:29:47
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋