Born at 37+1 but classed as Premature according to hospital records! Confused :-(

[abi17]

My little girl was born at 37 weeks and one day so by all mine and my partners reasoning she shouldn't be classed as premature. However we had too take her too the childrens ward for some checks as both me and the community midwife were concerned. However it was wrote in her red medical book (didn't check until we left the hospital) she's under the premature growth charts and also as classed as premature on her discharge letter but it doesnt have her gestation on. I rang up the hospital today and explained she was born with IUGR and was not premature as she was born at 37+1 and they said they would look into it but it was unlikely too get changed.
So my questions to you are-
Has your care differed from full term babies? If so how?
What will this mean for her in the future? As they've said it will be on her records for life
And finally I just wanted to say all you women are an inspiration, your children are fighters and you should be very proud of how you have dealt with this. I didn't no where else to post so I'm sorry if this offends anyone as I don't think we belong her but the NHS does seem too x
Oh also I was induced at 36+6 and there was speculation over my due date but it was agreed 12th November
Sorry again! I feel awful posting in here when you all have so much going on but I could do with some advice.
Abi x

 

[25weeker]

Hello

I can't say what differs from a term baby as my baby is an extreme prem so her care would differ from a late prem.

I was born at 35 weeks and its never had any impact on what I have wanted to do and I have never had to declare I was premature anywhere so I wouldn't worry about it affecting her future.

 

[katy1310]

I would totally agree with what 25 weeker said. Sophie was also an extreme preemie at 27 weeks, so I don't really know much about later premature babies but I'm sure it wouldn't impact on anything later in her life. So far, the only way I think Sophie's care has differed from fullterm babies is that has had to have is extra check ups that she wouldn't have had if she'd been fullterm, and we had weekly visits from the health visitor for a lot longer.

Congratulations on your LO

xx

 

[abi17]

Thank you so much for the advice I really appreciate it, congratulations too you both on your children too. It's great too see them both doing so well, there absolutely gorgeous girls 25 Weeker I'm sorry to read about you losing Rebecca
Abi x

 

[Crunchie]

My little girl was born at 37 weeks and one day so by all mine and my partners reasoning she shouldn't be classed as premature. However we had too take her too the childrens ward for some checks as both me and the community midwife were concerned. However it was wrote in her red medical book (didn't check until we left the hospital) she's under the premature growth charts and also as classed as premature on her discharge letter but it doesnt have her gestation on. I rang up the hospital today and explained she was born with IUGR and was not premature as she was born at 37+1 and they said they would look into it but it was unlikely too get changed.
So my questions to you are-
Has your care differed from full term babies? If so how?
What will this mean for her in the future? As they've said it will be on her records for life
And finally I just wanted to say all you women are an inspiration, your children are fighters and you should be very proud of how you have dealt with this. I didn't no where else to post so I'm sorry if this offends anyone as I don't think we belong her but the NHS does seem too x
Oh also I was induced at 36+6 and there was speculation over my due date but it was agreed 12th November
Sorry again! I feel awful posting in here when you all have so much going on but I could do with some advice.
Abi x

Hi ya hun

my daughter was born at 34+6 and all I have been told is that I would need to be mindful of her milestones may be later than other "full term " babies..... by the time she is 2 she should have caught up.
I must admit she was smiling about 2 weeks later than she should....... but every baby is different
Also they plot them differently in the red book .....
the GP and the HV plot different lines... GP class her as 2 weeks prem and the HV class her as 5

 

[AP]

Your care shouldn't change Hun just because of a label Hun, it should be based on health an development. ? Did your little one have any issues?

But you are right, she isn't premature I know 36 weekers who've never been classed prem because they were mature enough to go home right away. I do get offended by people who believe 37weeks+ is premature, it seems to belittle what a lot of us go through to me, but thats jus my opinion and i know some other ladies are more open minded than I am!(its the docs view that offends me in ur case tho not you! ) x

I would be concerned about how they are plotting her growth though and because of that I'd be putting the HV straight? Genuine preemies go by normal charts by their corrected age, unless they are off the charts and therefore need the preemie charts?

Maybe because of IUGR they might want to observe her? Thats the only reason i can think of, but you will probably find you will have more in common with term babies.

 

[nugget80]

My eldest was one of twins born at 31 weeks and for the first two years she had extra checks before being completely discharged from hospital care. Now at ten she is one of the tallest and brightest in her class. Think once they reach two they are expected to have caught up.

 

[girldot]

My son was born at 37+1 day and on his hospital record it says premature, although the health visitor did say he should be classed as full term cuz once they go past 37 weeks they're no longer premature.

 

[Erised]

Maybe the children are classed premature due to small birth weight rather than how long they were carried? I know that when Eleanor was born I was told both in hospital as well as during a midwife visit that if she had been just a little bit lighter she would have had to stay in hospital and be treated as 'premature' and be put in an incubator.

I think the main reason for this was that due to her small size and weight she couldn't hold her temperature like 'full term' babies (she was born at 40+2, weighing 2900grams and around 18" by guess as the length wasn't checked). She needed quite a few layers of clothes and blankets, a hot water bottle next to her at all times and we needed to check her temperature at every nappy change (every 3 hours) to make sure it remained constant. Which it didn't, we could tell when the water bottle started getting colder as her temp would drop.

Maybe that's why the notes say premature?

 

[notjustyet]

Hi Abi, Annie is also classed as premature even though she was born at 37+2, but i think it's because of her low birth weight (5lb4). I've been told she may take longer to establish bfing because she's small and may do things slightly later, but i wouldn't worry about the label premature as at over 37 weeks and not having had a stay in nicu i don't class my lo as a prem baby. x

 

[calypso]

Premature and preterm are different things. Baby may have been term but not mature.