LACTNET Archives

Lactation Information and Discussion

LACTNET@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Katherine Dettwyler <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Lactation Information and Discussion <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 24 Dec 2001 09:24:00 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (50 lines)
I've been following this thread about multiples with interest -- especially
JoAnne's comments about multiples slowing down even more in growth toward
the end of pregnancy, therefore being *more* disparate, not less disparate,
than singletons of the same gestational age, the longer they stay in.  And
JoAnne, with two sets of twins (and other children) you don't need to be
humbled because you didn't have triplets.  :)   But thanks for the chuckle.

Now my thoughts on this -- over the years, many many times I have heard
mothers of multiples (in person, on TV's "Baby Story" and through email) say
things like "35 weeks is considered FULL-TERM for twins."  Sometimes it's 36
weeks, or they're talking about triplets, etc.  Now, I suspect that what
*health care professionals* mean when they say this (I'm assuming the
mothers don't make this stuff up, I've heard it so often) is that it's great
if the mother can keep the babies inside for 35 or 36 weeks, and that
because there is so much premature labor with multiples, that the mother
shouldn't feel bad if the babies are born at 35 or 36 weeks -- in fact, she
should feel good that she kept them in so long.

But the way the mothers are *interpreting* this information is that
"Twins/triplets ARE full-term at 35 weeks."  In other words, that multiples
develop FASTER than singletons, and that if they are born at 35 or 36 weeks,
they are NOT premature, but are full-term and ready to go.

And this confusion to the fact that babies can be conceived immediately
after the end of a menstrual period, or up to two weeks later, not to
mention different rates of growth and development in utero for lots of other
reasons, and you have massive confusion about how many weeks a specific,
individual baby or babies have been 'gestating' and how mature their lungs,
nervous systems, muscles, etc. might be.

Both my first and second children were conceived the day after my menstrual
period ended, so the one who went two weeks past her due date was actually
much older (and perfectly fine when she was born).  The one who came a month
early by dates was not really a month 'premature' and didn't have any
problems with his lungs at all.

Could this be contributing to the confusion about when premature multiples
are ready to feed, ready to go home, etc?

Kathy Dettwyler, not a doctor, not an LC

_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com

             ***********************************************
The LACTNET mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software together with L-Soft's LSMTP(TM)
mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2