We are now in our 20th week of babywatch and all is going right according to schedule. Diane has gained the average amount of weight, her fundus was measured right at average, and the baby's femur length, abdomen size, and head circumference are all within the average range.

Still we are expecting a horse. We've been told that the size of the baby at birth is generally the average of the parents birth size. I was 8 lbs., 6 oz. and Diane was over 9 lbs. (Average birth weight is about 7 and a half lbs.) As far as Diane is concerned, this is not good news - she is only 5 ft. 2 inches tall. However, her mother is only 4 ft. 11 in. and gave birth to a 9 pounder, so I'm not too concerned. Of course, I'm not the one who has to go through labor and give birth to something that big.

We have just completed our second ultrasound and were able to watch the baby move around in the womb. Additionally, we recieved a series of still pictures that we can save for posterity. The technician operating the ultrasound claimed that we had one of the most active babies that she had ever seen. Constant movement. It was amazing to watch it open and close its mouth, yawn, suck its thumb, and, in general, kick and squirm.

In early January, we are scheduled to go in for a 40 minute ultrasound of which we will receive a videotape. Unfortunately, I just read an article in the New York Times claiming that not enough is known of ultrasounds to warrant their casual use. It seems that excessive exposure to ultrasound has been demonstrated to impair the hearing of fetal mice. We may have to rethink the long January session. But we have at least two more doctor's appointments before that time, so we'll have the opportunity to discuss in more detail the pros and cons.

Next volume - "Whether or not to videotape the actual birth."