Do babies come on their due dates?
This was the question on my mind during the later stages on my pregnancy in the spring of 2010. I heard a lot of conflicting information about what a "due date" meant and when babies were born. Some people saw the "due date" like a deadline... if the baby hasn't arrived yet, it's late, it's time to freak out. Some people said due dates were a bad example of western intervention, used by doctors as an excuse to cut us all open. Some people said that first time moms should expect to go late, it's normal and you should chill out. I found some scattered statistics about what week babies came... and a lot of those graphs just said "X% were born at 40 weeks" but didn't explain what that meant (during the 40th week of pregnancy? 40 weeks accomplished? On day 280?). And trust me if you're pregnant, you start counting DAYS when that time comes around. There is a huge difference between 40 weeks 0 days and 40 weeks 5 days.
I was unable to find great data that satisfied me. So, armed, with a website, I started running a simple survey about due dates. If you've had a baby, please take it!
So far the survey has had 13477 participants, and I've put together these pages of charts that show interesting things I've learned from the results. I am not a mathematician, so there's no in-depth statistical analysis. I'm an engineer, web programmer, and (as of 2010) mom. When I started the survey I was just a very very pregnant woman wondering when my baby was going to show up.
This first intro page is all about the methods used and why I think it's valid. If you don't care about the background, just want to see the dang averages, skip to this page or pick one of these:Due date statistics: A study on the length of pregnancy
For reference, here's the very basic plot of who took the survey:
I was unable to find daily breakdowns of when births occur, but there have been other studies about due date accuracy. I think the data is hard to find because the medical community has accepted the fact that it's impossible to exactly predict when a baby will show up, so they're okay with just knowing about when it happens, and us pregnant women are also urged to be okay with just knowing about when it will happen. But if you're a geek like me who loves statistics, that's tough.
All these studies describe the length of pregnancy in days. For reference, 280 days = 40 weeks = 9 months 6 days.
The length of human pregnancy as calculated by ultrasonographic measurement of the fetal biparietal diameter (H. Kieler, O. Axelsson, S. Nilsson, U. Waldenströ) has a very nice table of 10 published studies, which found various means between 272-283 days. The authors contribute their own results as well, recording over 800 mothers who went into labor spontaneously. When pregnancy length was calculated using ultrasound in the second trimester the mean was 280.6 days, standard deviation 9.7 days. When it was calculated using LMP, the mean was 283.6 days with a standard deviation of 10.5 days.
A study from the Swedish birth registry involving 427,582 singleton pregnancies the mean, median and modal durations of pregnancies were 281, 282 and 283 days respectively. The standard deviation was 13 days. This study did not consider whether labor was medically induced or not. (Duration of human singleton pregnancy—a population-based study, Bergsjφ P, Denman DW, Hoffman HJ, Meirik O.)
A 1999 study of over 17,000 spontaneous deliveries stated that due dates are more accurate if we add 282 days to LMP instead of 280 (Evaluation of ultrasound-estimated date of delivery in 17,450 spontaneous singleton births: do we need to modify Naegele's rule? Nguyen TH, Larsen T, Engholm G, Møller H.)
A 2003 London-based study of over 122,000 pregnancies with spontaneous onset of labor (except they call it "labour" because, well, you know) found that average gestational age at delivery was 40 weeks for white Europeans but only 39 weeks for members of the black and asian ethnic groups. I chose not to ask for ethnicity or race in my survey because it's so hard to define, so many people are a combination of races, but the study is interesting. Another note: it was made up entirely of first time ("nulliparous") mothers. (International Journal of Epidemiology 2003;33:107–113 Roshni R Patel,Philip Steer,Pat Doyle,Mark P Littleand Paul Elliott)
And finally there's this 1990 Harvard study called The length of uncomplicated human gestation (Mittendorf et al). The study looked at 31 first-time moms at one private practice to conclude that their average due date was eight days early. That's not a very big sample size, which I think is why it's the only study that found 288 days as the median. I really wish people would stop bringing it up, but it seems to be popular so I'll just say if you want to read it and come to your own conclusions, it's here.
Come on people, if 288 days was really the median that means that more than half of all pregnancies would end past 41 weeks... seems like we would have noticed something like that by now.
There is good weekly data from the CDC that talks about birthweight and weight gain and inductions and all kinds of good stuff. But it's not the daily breakdown I wanted, and it doesn't break down weekly stats by whether the births were spontaneous or induced.
It became apparent to me by reading studies that no matter what factor people added into consideration, it was still impossible to predict the start of labor. Even IVF patients, who know the HOUR their baby was created, don't get accurate due dates. So I see no point in taking all these factors into consideration, if it's going to be a range of dates lets just all throw whatever randomness we have into the pot and see what the range is. Several studies and my survey have found that there's a standard deviation of over a week... this makes the bell curve pretty flat on top. Moving a due date a day up or back based on ovulation really makes no difference because all the dates around 40W are almost equal in terms of your probability of going into labor.
Science wasn't really my goal. By that I mean I'm not terribly interested in how the human body works... I'm interested in how life is for women like me. The women who are reading this and visiting my website are mostly internet users from english-speaking countries... well, so are my survey participants. I see that as a good thing.
That said, even if it's not scientific the fact that the results are matching real scientific studies mean that I must be doing something right. The studies mentioned a few paragraphs above here seem to support the fact that the 280 day mean, 9-10 day standard deviation is the norm... well that's what my results show too. I think if the big numbers about the curves are correct than the little details are likely to be correct also.
Twin births make things slightly out of the norm, so they are not included in the chart. This excludes 105 results. I didn't really ask good survey questions for twins anyway. If you are pregnant with twins and looking for data, there's a good survey going over here.
In addition, around 200 results I started noticing a big spike in the number of babies born on their due date. I believe this is because women who have their babies on their due dates are more likely to remember it, and be enthusiastic about taking a survey. To account for this I've capped the number of results shown at exactly 40 W, and 282 results are excluded.
Due Date Survey DataDue date statistics: A study on the length of pregnancy
Probability of delivery resulting from spontaneous labor after 35 weeks
Probability of delivery within x days of a given date
Length of pregnancy by week
Spontaneous labor and due date determination
Length of pregnancy, comparing subsequent births for individual moms
Length of pregnancy for first time vs. second & third time moms
Length of pregnancy, type of delivery
Gestation vs. Birthweight
Probablity of Induction after a given day
Average day of spontaneous labor vs. age of mother at time of birth
Are more babies born during a full moon?
What's the most common day of the week for babies to be born?
I'm still pregnant at 40W. What's it mean?
Do winter babies arrive later?
What if I know my conception date?
Are boys or girls born later?
Subsequent pregnancy date search
How do inductions bias the due date statistics?
Download the data
Survey input dates
More ResourcesPregnancy Day-by-Day
Fast pregnancy calendar
Baby age calendar
EDD Icon Generator
Jo's Birth Story
Weeks vs. Months Explained
Charts generated by flot
If a boy who has a penis asks if he's a boy and you don't just say yes, then that's straight up lunacy.
What he decides to do with that boyhood or how he dresses is up to him. But if you're born with a penis you're a boy.
Making it airy fairy when, statistically, scientifically, less than 1% of 1% of children born have true gender dysphoria, is immoral and wrong. It's also a sign of our troubled times.
This is just my anecdotal experience but...
I have experienced bullying based on simply engaging in normal children's play with girls. Insults were attacks on both me and the girls. But I NEVER questioned my gender as a male. So if a child asks me if he's a boy and was identified biologically as one, I am going to question what influences are on the child before I answer.
egg freezing seems like a good option esp if you have extra time and money.
but I take them to restaurants so I know they end up hating 90% of the things they ask for.
- kid would like a sibling
- maybe people are right about end of life stuff
That's about it. I hated being pregnant, the last time I was pregnant the hormones were... really awful. Plus kid is now pretty big so another one would be weird and we gave away all our stuff.
I can still highly recommend this book: (
Also, keep speaking English! Toddlers forget fast when a language is no longer present.
Mels, I know Cordelia Fine's books on gender and neuroscience address little kids and the infleunces they receive at certain points. To my memory, her work was mainly demonstrative - hey, yes, kids are externally exposed to gender at very early points, and we can see kids beginning to internalize these ideas about gender.
Looking at Wikipedia, I know I've read one of the cited articles before and found it interesting (Martin, C. L. (1990). "Attitudes and Expectations about Children with Nontraditional and Traditional Gender Roles". Sex Roles. 22 (3-4): 151–66.) The gist is that understandings of gender begin to emerge by ages 2 or 3, and they continue to develop over the course of years, which includes some stigma (esp. for boys) when people step outside of understood roles. Then this article is more recent than that (2017), by the same author, and (based on my skim) seems to have pretty decent coverage in the articles it uses (
Somehow MIL has still given us a ton of pink clothing that she'll change him into everytime she comes over.
I hate pink.
I had an appointment with the obgyn today. He seems to think I'm even farther along than he originally thought. I didn't have an ultrasound. He just went by the size of my uterus. It's well over my belly button now. He's sending me to a high risk Dr. Asap and then I'm suppost to see him again on the 29th. By then he said they will have a better idea as to how far along I actually am. So far the pregnancy is going well. I did have complications with my first one and went to a specialist but this time I'm being referred to one because I'm old lol. They automatically send women when they are 35 and older.
I found this article (
The findings suggest that solo motherhood, in itself, does not result in psychological problems for children.
The lit review at the beginning of the article adds some specificity here. What seems hard on kids is not single parenthood itself; it's often the divorce that results in a single parent being involved.
Then there are people who become single parents, but not by choice. That's also rough, often because these parents lack the financial stability and stability to do well. So the article is really looking at
These studies have consistently shown that children whose parents divorce are more likely to show emotional and behavioral problems than are children in intact families (Amato, 2000, 2001, 2005; Coleman & Glenn, 2009; Hetherington & Stanley-Hagan, 1999; Pryor & Rodgers, 2001). However, the children’s difficulties appear to be largely associated with aspects of the divorce, rather than single-parenthood, in itself. single parents by choice
Not having read your post, but just the heading, my response was "wine." But after reading your post, I thought "wine."
Yes. After bedtime.
Also, honestly the only way we made it through was we would take turns being the center of focus. We still do this, divide and conquer (and she's only one kid, hell). Also, I know people are like really limit screen time BUT if you really need to get something done one episode of e.g. Daniel Tiger or Paw Patrol or whatever isn't gonna be too bad. I think DarkOne has some good ideas too.
Also I know you can do wills and stuff on your own but honestly I found it super useful to talk through it with a lawyer who does that. She thought of things we never would have. (hm really should revisit now that kid is older) It was a one time fee and not that bad.
We do most of our banking through a credit union. Have been happy with them. We refinanced our mortgage through them when we did that. I remember the big credit union bust ages ago, but there are lots more protections in place now and big banks can be pretty awful.
Today for the first time my 11month old showed interest in a stuffed animal. Just before Christmas we received a box from Amazon with a giant bear inside. No gift wrap, no note. Just a bear the size of my child. It's been sat in his room and ignored completely, despite him exploring literally everything else that is in there. Then, out of the blue, he made a beeline for it and tried to pull its eyes out.