Mummies/Daddies of preemies approaching the Big 2!

[DonnaBallona]

Hi everybody

I hope you dont mind me posting, I dont post here much now as I feel a bit of a fraud seeing as Brooke is getting all grown up now!

(For those who dont remember/know me, Brooke was born 7 weeks early due to severe IUGR, amongst other things. I had severe pre-e that went undetected. She weighed in at a modest 2lb 4oz at birth.)

I just wondered, we have been being told since she was born that Brooke will be caught up completley by the time she is two-which is going to be January

I just wondered if any other Mummies/Daddies of older prems agreed with that or not? Im not 100% sure if I do or not to be honest-Brooke is STILL wearing 6-9 month clothes and STILL not hit the 20lb mark yet. she is a good few inches shorter than her friends who were born near their due date, and seems to be doing things slower than them too.

Now, I will stress that Im not at all concermed with her development or size seeing as she is happy and healthy-I just wondered if this 'by the time they are two' quote is feasible/true for anyone else?

TIA xx

 

[Fiestagal]

I'll watch this thread with interest! Connor was severe IUGR too, at the moment he is still following his own curve with no signs of catch up yet.

 

[Anna_due Dec]

I had a 27 weeker and i would have considered him just a little bit behind at 2. He was running around and spoke quite well but he was a bit uncoordinated. At 4 nobody would spot him for a prem. He's super bright and not at all small for his age.

 

[nkbapbt]

Hi!

Lakai just turned two actual, and was 23.4 weeks...we were told the same thing about him being all caught up by two. And I hear it a lot from other preemie parents. I can say from my point of view, it's bull and a lot of preemie parents on my preemie forum agree.

That being said, I don't really feel like it's a huge deal. Lakai is almost 21 months old corrected. And thats still three almost four months of development that leaves him behind his peers who were not preemies.

I honestly think/wish they (the NICU) would say a more realistic age like 3 or 4. Where the age difference in my mind doesn't play such a huge part.

I think all preemies will get there, I think like their births they follow their own paths and don't follow set rules.

I also think that since there hasn't been much in the way of research and studies done on full term baby developments in YEARS....that its even fair to use the guidelines that they do.

I also don't think it's fair that growth charts do not take into account race, preterm births and so on.

She will get there! =))

 

[Anna_due Dec]

I agree, 3 or 4 is far more reasonable.

 

[Laura2919]

Personally I dont think the twins will be caught up by two. Although I class them as a 2 year old I havent experienced life with a 2 year old before so I dont really know what happens at and around 2. Does that make sense lol..
They walked late, 17 months and have only just started saying words but still not a sentance. Our consultant appointment has just been moved to 8th Feb. They told us this will be our last consultants appointment and if any further issues they will be referred to a new team. But there isnt any concerns

 

[DonnaBallona]

many thanks for all the relies. nkbapbt, i completley 100% agree with everything you've said. completley OT, but I cant BELIEVE Lucky Lakai is TWO?!!!!


I also agree that they should give a more realistic age for new preemie parents, as 2 sneaks up on you pretty quickly and it doesnt help if you're already expreiencing mild concerns about size and development etc, just to then remember what they've said and worry further unnecessarily.

Laura2919, Brooke was recently discharged from the peadiatricians too! she's had sooooooo many tests done, with them insisting something was wrong with her because of her size but they found absolutley nothing. I was sooooo super pleased walking away from there, I can tell you!

Thanks for all the muchly reassuring replies ladies-it seems we are all experiencing the same thing!

 

[nkbapbt]

After some sleep and thinking about this question more...I just wanted to add..I have talked to the NICU follow up clinic doctors/OT/nurse about why they say two years and they have flat out admitted that the research (maybe just here in Canada though) is really not that great for preemies and their development. And because of it they are not actually really sure when most preemies will be all caught up.

I personally think they say two years to give us preemie parents hope. Hope is a powerful thing. We all want our kids to be "normal" whatever that means really. In the mist of the having a preemie, the heartache, the difficulty of it all....hope is very important. Knowing there will be a finish line in prematurity and our kids will one day not be preemies, is important. But really not realistic.

I know preemies in grade school who still show signs of prematurity. They have slight or drastic learning troubles, some have very weak immune systems, some are smaller than their peers. I am clearly not a doctor and cannot say that these kids have these struggles because of being preemies, but it's so common I think it must be related.

Does this mean our kids are not normal or caught up? I don't really think so. Even full term babies and kids have these struggles. And sometimes I think the looming cloud of being a "preemie" hangs over our heads and our kids heads for too long...and we think every delay (Lakai didn't walk until he was 17 months either, he is slightly behind in language too...but I walked late...and his dad talked late) is premature birth related. But what if it's not?

I think the "they will be caught up by two" applies more to the general development charts all doctors use to make sure all kids are on track. Like walking by 18 months, rolling over by 3-6 months...

But still does not mean our kids will be caught up to their peers in every way. I know Lakai is slightly immature compared to his peers, he still has a lot of baby like needs, and he just looks younger.

I hope this made sense...Im just waking up. LOL

 

[Mumof42009]

As many of you know I had 4 premature babies my dd2 was smallest at just over 2lbs, she's 8 now and alot smaller compared to the other kids in her class she also had some educational needs when she 1st started school. I don't think anybody can say if they will catch up or not and I think this should be taken into account when they start school as well. (sorry if gone off the point lol).

 

[embojet]

Hi! Cant believe they are our babies are nearly two! Molly seems to have caught up in most areas. She hasnt seen a paed or anyone for ages, and I have no idea what she weighs . She is still in 12-18 month clothes (some of them are still too big). her speech and movement seem on par with others her age.

 

[Dona]

Archie will be two in feb and he is only really behind with his speech. He's not small for his age either. The hospital said to us that it's two corrected prems catch up. From knowing alot of Mums with prem babies, I think two is a bit unfair. Three to four is more like it.

It's great to hear how the older prems on this site are getting on. I'm hardly on here now xx