Friday, May 18, 2012

Estimated Due Dates...Are They Being Calculated WRONG?

With Brandon, I went into pre-term labor at 34 weeks. Luckily, bed rest was enough to keep him in for a little longer. He arrived at 40 weeks and 5 days.

With Daniella, we didn't realize until she was born that she was "post-due"...she had all the "classic signs" of a late baby. We thought she was only born one day after her due date, but in reality she was born at 43 weeks 0 days. Having PCOS, my cycles can be difficult to track accurately. I had mistaken implantation bleeding as a cycle.

Were my children born "late"? I do not believe so. They were both born when they were ready. I was not induced, nor did I have c-sections (scheduled or otherwise).

But were their "due dates" accurate"? No. Especially when you factor in that I have PCOS, which makes my cycles longer than the 28 days cycles that due dates are based off of.

This is a very intriguing article which explains more about the history of why due dates are calculated the way they are.

Within that article, there is a link that takes us to another article that explains a more accurate way of calculating a due date. If we look at due dates that way, then the funny thing is....Brandon's due date "should have been" March 1 and he was born Feb. 26. Daniella's "should have been" Sept. 26 and she was born Oct. 29???? I don't know about that one! :) But it would explain the prodromal labor I had that began about Oct. 8th!