![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Have I kept you in suspense long enough? It wasn't actually on purpose. Our 3:00 appointment was with Dr. Late who was off performing a cesarean. It was after 4:30 before we even got called back there. In the meantime, we saw two entire sets of patients come in and leave, I had to go to the bathroom twice--so it was lucky that I didn't actually need a full bladder after all (I did give up and call this morning because M nagged me about it so much)--and then I started straightening the pictures on the wall because I COULD NOT STAND IT ANYMORE. We didn't get home until 5:30, and then, my mom was still here, and when she left, we had to go find something to eat (which, McDonald's, because we have celebrated all our really big moments by going there, because we are ODD.) So, this is the first chance I've had to post. Not that you're reading this paragraph anyway because you've jumped ahead to the next line already.
I do have a few pictures, but they're not very good. I have one creepy-baby face shot that I might post, and an adorable tiny footsie, but the money shot is at a very odd angle, so there's not much point in showing it. I'm too tired to scan them, though, so maybe tomorrow. She said that she felt pretty sure, although there is, of course, no guarantee.
The technician did the first part of the ultrasound. She measured everything, giving us a running commentary on what everything was. She said that it wouldn't record (the lady I talked to this morning said that she thought it was broken) but M had the handy dandy camcorder with him, so we have it on film anyway, if in an odd way. She assured us that everything was measuring wonderfully, and that we had a "great-looking baby". Heart fine, brain fine, everything measuring as it should. When she was done, I stayed on the table until Dr. Late came in, and he basically did the same ultrasound again (if a tiny bit quicker.) He pushed down much harder than she did, but his pictures were clearer. I can only imagine that the technician could remember that it doesn't actually feel that good. ;) The baby is currently breech (double-footling breech, and I found this article to be really interesting because you know I googled it.) I'm not worried about that, of course, since it's so early still, but I did laugh because I knew that she was kicking my cervix this week, and sure enough, the doctor said "there's the feet, there's your bladder, there's your cervix, and that's where she'll be kicking you." It amazes me how much of it is stuff that you know when you feel it and yet, HOW do you know? But, you do, it seems. It's really cool.
So, a girl! M has been saying it all along, so he is happy to be proven right. And also because it's a girl! Although we would have been just as happy had it been a boy. A girl, with long legs (apparently) and measuring with a due date of May 25, so he didn't bother changing my previous date of May 26. M and I looked at each other when he said that, but we didn't say anything. (Isn't that one of the best parts of being married, conversing without words?) My due date really is May 25, because some of us have dates that are more exact than estimated date of ovulation. ;)
This is really convenient because both
totte and
big_bubba balked at betrothing boy children, but
carrieb and I have big plans for Erik and Ducky. :)
It's a girl!
I do have a few pictures, but they're not very good. I have one creepy-baby face shot that I might post, and an adorable tiny footsie, but the money shot is at a very odd angle, so there's not much point in showing it. I'm too tired to scan them, though, so maybe tomorrow. She said that she felt pretty sure, although there is, of course, no guarantee.
The technician did the first part of the ultrasound. She measured everything, giving us a running commentary on what everything was. She said that it wouldn't record (the lady I talked to this morning said that she thought it was broken) but M had the handy dandy camcorder with him, so we have it on film anyway, if in an odd way. She assured us that everything was measuring wonderfully, and that we had a "great-looking baby". Heart fine, brain fine, everything measuring as it should. When she was done, I stayed on the table until Dr. Late came in, and he basically did the same ultrasound again (if a tiny bit quicker.) He pushed down much harder than she did, but his pictures were clearer. I can only imagine that the technician could remember that it doesn't actually feel that good. ;) The baby is currently breech (double-footling breech, and I found this article to be really interesting because you know I googled it.) I'm not worried about that, of course, since it's so early still, but I did laugh because I knew that she was kicking my cervix this week, and sure enough, the doctor said "there's the feet, there's your bladder, there's your cervix, and that's where she'll be kicking you." It amazes me how much of it is stuff that you know when you feel it and yet, HOW do you know? But, you do, it seems. It's really cool.
So, a girl! M has been saying it all along, so he is happy to be proven right. And also because it's a girl! Although we would have been just as happy had it been a boy. A girl, with long legs (apparently) and measuring with a due date of May 25, so he didn't bother changing my previous date of May 26. M and I looked at each other when he said that, but we didn't say anything. (Isn't that one of the best parts of being married, conversing without words?) My due date really is May 25, because some of us have dates that are more exact than estimated date of ovulation. ;)
This is really convenient because both
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
no subject
Date: 2007-01-18 01:51 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-01-18 02:45 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-01-18 02:27 am (UTC)Anyway... GRATTIS! En liten tösabit!
no subject
Date: 2007-01-18 02:45 pm (UTC)Thanks. :)
no subject
Date: 2007-01-18 02:48 am (UTC)Yay!
no subject
Date: 2007-01-18 02:46 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-01-18 03:55 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-01-18 03:04 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-01-18 03:59 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-01-18 03:07 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-01-18 07:13 am (UTC)Seriously, I was on pins and needles all day! Starting from about 8 or 9pm my time, I kept counting back to your time and figuring that you might be back. I checked more often than I'd like to admit for this post, until I finally had to go to bed around midnight, then I came to the computer as soon as I got up this morning!
Congratulations!
no subject
Date: 2007-01-18 03:08 pm (UTC)Thanks!
no subject
Date: 2007-01-18 07:45 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-01-18 03:08 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-01-18 09:46 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-01-18 03:08 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-01-18 10:52 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-01-18 03:08 pm (UTC)Sugar and spice and everything nice
Date: 2007-01-18 11:17 am (UTC)Congratulations!!!!!
And I'd like to mention again about
Re: Sugar and spice and everything nice
Date: 2007-01-18 03:11 pm (UTC)I was actually thinking "Lambi" would be a good name...
Re: Sugar and spice and everything nice
Date: 2007-01-18 03:21 pm (UTC)Lambi is thrilled that her name may be considered. I'd like to see M's mother's face if she thought her granddaughter was going to be called Lambi.
Re: Sugar and spice and everything nice
Date: 2007-01-18 03:57 pm (UTC)Thanks for the link. I like the theory of giving the kid a very Swedish name, but in practice.. not so much. There are a few that sound nice, but many of them just do not translate well to my English-speaking ears.
Re: Sugar and spice and everything nice
Date: 2007-01-18 04:15 pm (UTC)Yes, some of those Swedish names are a bit odd, aren't they? Imagine calling her Fanny, which is popular here, but something to snigger over in the States and to roar with laughter over in Australia, where it refers to quite another part of the body...
The boys' names are even worse. Could your mum even say Kjell?
My kids had to be named after their paternal grandparents (the pressure was enormous), which is how they came to have such unusual names. My son always loved his name and was proud to be named after his grandfather as well as the patron saint of Italy (Francesco). My daughter used to dislike her name (Filomena) and went by Nina for years, but now she has gone back to it, liking the fact that it is a little different.
Have fun finding something you both like.
no subject
Date: 2007-01-18 02:21 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-01-18 03:12 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-01-18 04:02 pm (UTC)Question: So the not-telling-the family-the-name doesn't hold true for LJ right? :-P
no subject
Date: 2007-01-18 06:36 pm (UTC)Answer: Unfortunately, it does. We may cave in after we know a name, but we're sticking to it for now. Strangely, I seem to be holding fast more than M, and he was the one all gung ho about it to begin with.
no subject
Date: 2007-01-19 04:23 am (UTC)The name thing is funny, whatever you pick will be fine. I don't think I've ever heard a name someone has been considering and thought, "Oh God no!!!" I guess I grew up around enough hippies that I'm pretty unphased by funky name choices. An interesting trend I've noticed are my friends that are going for simple names only because hardly anyone picks them anymore: Jane, Maggie, Mary. No matter the preconceived notions you have about a person with the name X, once it's your baby, that will be the one and only association.
no subject
Date: 2007-01-18 08:46 pm (UTC)Oh, I have goose bumps all over!!!! This is so exciting!!!!! I love her already!!!!!!!!!!
no subject
Date: 2007-01-18 08:59 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-01-18 08:48 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-01-18 09:00 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-01-21 02:38 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-01-23 12:12 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-01-22 12:23 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-01-23 12:13 am (UTC)