Pages

Sunday, August 19, 2007

Waiting...

Well, the truth is that we've got most things that we can think of ready. So - for those keeping score - the "official" due date is August 28th, which means that we're into a time when something could happen soon, or not for two or three weeks.

I started trying to look up statistics on gestation times, but it's one of those things that's hard on the Internet - strangely, scientific articles are likely to be available in summary but not in full (which unfortunately feels like the bait-and-switch of those damn pay-for-answers sites that are so good at getting the questions indexed by search engines), and meanwhile I can't seem to find good search terms to pull out any less-formal information that doesn't look like bunk or hearsay.  Not that some of the science doesn't look the same when pressed - the standard Naegele rule of 266 days from ovulation or 280 days from last menstrual period dates from 1812, but other variations point out something like an additional week for first-time babies.  More recent studies seem to indicate that, where an early ultrasound is available with certain readings, dating based on that can be much more accurate.  I hope so - our ultrasound gave us a date significantly earlier than other methods.

However - from what I can tell and in round numbers - a few percent of babies are born premature (<37 weeks).  Including those, maybe 15-20% total are born by our current time (cusp of 39 weeks completed).  The next three weeks have  something like 20%, 35%, and 20% respectively of the total,  and perhaps 10% of first babies would go past 42 weeks without intervention (though in this country that's increasingly hard to accomplish).   So, it's a fair bet that we won't have a baby in a week - or rather, the 50-50 money is on the two weeks following.  But from my perspective, a 1-in-5 chance that something happens in the next week is plenty to think about.   The midwives we're working with have been, perhaps predictably, rather inscrutable on this topic, although the midwife today at Christi's visit said the baby was "very low" and asked "are you ready?".  Hints?  You decide...

(For the statistics, do your own searching, or check out things like: http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=233200.)

In other news, we actually bought some diapers yesterday - not enough to last long, but I've been told it's like taking an umbrella out with you. It won't rain if you take it . . . and the baby will only be early if we're not ready? "Ready" is seeming like a relative term these days.  But, we've got enough diapers to survive while we cry on the phone for someone to go to the diaper store.

I was saying to Christi, I feel a bit like we're screwing up the planning because it's all "functional". What do we take to the hospital, how do we know when to go, who feeds Jolly while we're gone, do we have what we'll need when we come back? As if we're ignoring the part where, when a friend comes to visit, you decide what you'll do with them. Should we go into the city and get dinner? See a movie? Go to the Science Museum or the Aquarium?  Turns out that in this case, we don't need big plans to go out.  Oh, well.

So - the next time I post, we could be three.  Or not.  But at least it's not too likely to mess with my average time between posts . . . 

2 comments:

M&M + 1 said...

Based on some info I've found (the reading the ever exciting, but not necessarily FACT filled baby center boards) more first time moms go around 41 weeks...not 40.

Well, whether with your stats and/or with the baby center gals, I still could potentially be expecting sometime in 2008 not 2007. Somehow that sounds a lot further away...

edie said...

Well, I just thought I'd say that if you ever need access to scientific articles, I have that in abundance.