Anyone with baby born at 36 or 37 weeks? Adjusted age?

[squirrel.]

Hi ladies,

My daughter was born at 36+6. Earlier in the pregnancy at 13 weeks my due date had been moved forward 5 days due to her size. I know when I ovulated (I charted temps, used OPKs, checked saliva ferning and charted CM - so I m definite!) and I'd had a scan at 7 weeks where the baby was measuring right on for my dates, so I reckon at 13 weeks she was just a bit on the large side, which led to my due date being pushed forward. So by my reckoning she was born closer to 36 weeks.

Anyway, after that ramble. Would you expect a 36/37 week baby to do things on schedule? I know premature babies have an adjusted age, but my daughter was practicially full term. Do I still expect her to do things on time or allow for the three/four weeks that she was early?

She's 6 weeks now and still sleeps a huge amount of time (like a very new baby) and she's not smiling yet (I know the window for this is 4-8 weeks so I'm not worried, just excitedly waiting for it). Just wondering if the reason for this is because she was early and I shouldn't expect her to behave like a 6 week old when she would only be 2/3 weeks now.

Thanks.

 

[Dime Cuando]

My LO was delivered by EMCS @ 37+3 (more like 37 according to my calculations) due to cholestasis.

She just turned 1 and up to now, I think she's hit the mile stones pretty much on time - obviously all children are different but I've never 'used' the adjusted age when considering her development. But like you LO, she was f/term.

 

[BellaBoo0512]

My LO was born at 37+2 and is now 16 months. I've never used an adjusted age. He did crawl, walk and get teeth a month or so behind the average age but I'm not worried in the slightest. He is happy, healthy and thriving and that's all I can wish for x

 

[squirrel.]

Thanks ladies. I guess in the long run one monthy won't make a difference. Maybe in these early days though 4 weeks can make a big difference? As in if they're supposed o be doing something at 8 weeks, but they're 4 weeks 'younger' in terms of gestatuonal age then maybe that makes a difference?

 

[AP]

On the scale of things, i wouldn't adjust. All babies are different. Adjusting an age is more of a benefit for younger preemies and big milestones.

 

[jd83]

My younger son was born at 36 weeks. I didn't adjust for that, he seemed to do fine with milestones. Slower than ds1 with rolling, crawling, wAlking, etc but still pretty normal overall.

 

[TTCaWee1]

My DD was born at 34+0 and so far she has hit her milestones on time or early. And we spent 3 weeks in the hospital because she was quite sick. I wouldn't worry.

 

[Scout]

my lo was born at 35w2d and we never used adjusted age.

 

[MindUtopia]

My daughter was born at 37+2 (37+5 by scan dates, but I know when I ovulated and have longer cycles). I never used an adjusted age as she was term, but I did notice that she seemed to do things just a couple weeks later than my friends' babies, all of whom were born 40-42 weeks. She was very, very sleepy the first few weeks as earlier babies can be and struggled to gain weight at first, so I think she just had a slow start. She's hit all the developmental milestones perfectly and is now running around and very talkative. So I wouldn't say she's behind in anyway, but in the early weeks, it's a lot more noticeable when they aren't doing something that a baby the same age is doing. Now she's caught up or even ahead of those same babies developmentally.