to think the usefuness of home pregnancy tests is outweighed by the grief they cause?

(90 Posts)

as most people have-i have used pregnancy tests and found it much easier tha going to the doctors.

However i am reading so many threads where people are testing all the time at different times of day and different times in their cycle and getting upset and stressing and i am wndering if they ar worth the heartbreak?

in my mums day you didn't go to the doctors until you had missed 2 periods and by then it was pretty certain.

now we are testing before we are even late.
apart from making the test manufacturers rich, who is this benefitting?

people who in past times would never have known they has miscarried-just had a heavy period at the usual time-now have the heartbreak of that knowledge. People with 'chemical pregnancies' get the grief of that-when previosly they wouldn't have known.

what do you think?

OracleInaCoracle Thu 24-Apr-08 17:13:23

this is a very interesting thread. I no longer test before my period is due because i have been ttc for 2.5y now and have had 7 early mc's. if i hadnt tested those times then i may have just thought that it was taking me a long time, in which case the treatment is very different. i have to test on the day my period is due because of my ep. i cant risk my fertility further, and often dread getting a bfp. however, the odds of getting an early bfp arent great. like aitch i often get early bfp's and ive reached the point now where i would rather not know, but i understand the desperate need to test, and KNOW. especially if you have been ttc for a long time. that hypothetical baby becomes the be all and end all.

AitchTwoOhelicopterfraek Thu 24-Apr-08 15:52:40

...whatever that is. smile

AitchTwoOhelicopterfraek Thu 24-Apr-08 15:52:18

very sorry to hear that, truly. sad the person to whom i refer was i think 39 when she got pg with dd, but i know it doesn't really mean anything in the scheme of things. i hope something wonderful happens soon.

duchesse Thu 24-Apr-08 15:48:05

Not looking very likely for me alas Aitch- Its been 4.5 years of chemical pregnancies every 2-3 months, with only one pregnancy that lasted long enough to be confirmed medically (and that miscarried at 13 weeks). I am now 40, so really not very likely any more... GPs not interested/ willing to refer me.

AitchTwoOhelicopterfraek Thu 24-Apr-08 15:23:58

exactly teuch.
gutted for you, duchesse, i know someone who had ten (i swear to god) miscarriages and somehow her dd stuck around to be a full-term preg no 11. although i bet people tell you that sort of hopeful story a lot and it gets right on your tits, so i'm sorry if so. i hope that lightning strikes for you some day soon. smile

there you go...two excellent examples of why women shoudl be allowed to make up their own minds about testing v not testing!!

duchesse Thu 24-Apr-08 15:02:52

If I did an early pregnancy test and it was positive I would get a period a few days later anyway. So defo not worth the heartache for me...

AitchTwoOhelicopterfraek Thu 24-Apr-08 13:23:36

if you've done a pg test and had a positive result you are ahead of the game and can insist on further investigation, which might allow you to get metho and keep your tube, rather than have an emergency op where your future fertility is rather less of a priority than saving your life. and once you've had one ectopic, beleive me, those pg tests are your best friend. highest maternal killer in the UK, don't forget.

duchesse Thu 24-Apr-08 13:14:51

Aitch- yes, you do have a point. I don't know much about ectopic though, but I rather thought that the only way an HPT could help in an EP situation would be to alert the women should she have any unexplained bleeding/ pain after doing an HPT. I'm sure that ladies of old "knew" that they were in the early stages of pregnancy, just hadn't had it confirmed yet.

suedonim Thu 24-Apr-08 13:08:25

I didn't even know you could test before your period was due until recently. blush Certainly, I think the availability of tests in general is a good thing. I'm old enough that for my first two pg's I had to wait until I'd missed two periods then trot along to the Dr for confirmation (or not) and I welcomed the ability to test at home.

But I think testing at earlier and earlier times is a blank cheque for mfgrs. Nor had I hadn't heard of chemical pregnancies until I read about it on MN, but surely it's possible that such pg's are part and parcel of human physiology, and have always occured. I suspect that, according to accounts here, I may have had dozens of chemcial pg's/mc's. I don't think it would have been of any benefit to me to have known at the time, partly because of my assumption it would take a few months to get pg anyway. (Hence my surprise when dd2 first made her presence felt! grin)

AitchTwoOhelicopterfraek Thu 24-Apr-08 12:46:52

oh duchesse. if they'd had an ectopic they'd have died long before they'd have got near the rabbit.

AitchTwoOhelicopterfraek Thu 24-Apr-08 12:45:18

just look at what people have posted on here... 'happier after i stopped testing early/didn't get hopes up etc'. they weren't pregnant every month and getting negative tests, they were Not Pregnant and getting negative tests. if they'd had a positive test they'd have been delighted.

and for me, twice, those early tests quite literally saved my life and my future fertility.

duchesse Thu 24-Apr-08 12:42:58

Have stopped buying em. Que sera, sera. Fuckall chance of me getting pregnant anyway, so HPT not going to make a whole lot of difference anyway. Having them in the house was justing playing on my nerves. In the old days, you used to have to wait to about 3 months and then have your pee injected into a rabbit and you wouldn't even know for sure until about 13-14 weeks. Were they any the worse off? (apart from the poor bunnies of course?) I don't think so...

AitchTwoOhelicopterfraek Thu 24-Apr-08 12:42:06

that's utter nonsense, for precisely the reasons i've just stated.

as i said with odds of 50% you might as well flip a coin

AitchTwoOhelicopterfraek Thu 24-Apr-08 12:36:05

i have always had a positive test before or on the day my period was due, dd was 9dpo. and yes, i know when i ovulated.
50% is even money by the way, that's good odds, and ime it's higher than that. from what i understand of hpts they are obliged to understate their accuracy because they can't guarantee that their production methods will put the same amount of reactant on each strip.
the fact is, if you're pregnant and you know when you ovulated and had sex, you'll probably get a positive before your period but sometimes won't.
if you're not pregnant you definitely won't. it's not being pregnant that causes the pain, not the tests themselves.

Disenchanted Thu 24-Apr-08 12:27:46

I think its just down to individual women.

I test early, I have to, I can't help it.

My friend waited till she was 2 weeks late until she tested, that would have killed me!

anniemac Thu 24-Apr-08 12:24:31

Message withdrawn

but who all thinks that they will be one of those 50%??

50% is not bad odds, considering...

wannaBe Thu 24-Apr-08 11:55:15

but, if these tests didn't claim to be able to give you a positive result before your period was due then people wouldn't spend as much money on them. They are only 50% accurate before your period is due, so half the time you're not going to get an accurate result, and will either, go out and buy another two/three/four tests, or your period will arrive and you'll be gutted, and will have spent an unnecessary 8 quid.

IMO early pregnancy tests have not been invented to reassure women, they have been invented for the manufacturers to make more money. If tests said "only accurate from day of missed period" less women would put themselves through that heartache in the first place.

50% accurate is not accurate.

Oblomov Thu 24-Apr-08 11:45:31

We can't blame pregnnacy tests for this.
It is becasue we are so sesperate to know. But that is our problem as ladies/society and not the fault of the kit itself.

EffiePerine Thu 24-Apr-08 11:40:52

Well, I think women should be able to test for pg themselves. but I don't see that testing early is beneficial at all - my worry is that the number of people testing warly when TTC is normalising early testing, whereas the norm used to be testing when your period is late ... if you think you SHOULD test early while TTCing you're opening yourself up to a whole lot of (often unnecessary) stress and heartache.

AitchTwoOhelicopterfraek Thu 24-Apr-08 11:35:43

great, but this is a thread patting people on the head and claiming that the grief caused by hpts outweighs their usefulness... it might do for some people but not for others. it's hardly going to be a personal choice if the tests aren't available and we have to go to our docs after a couple of missed periods. i'd be dead for a start. hmm

I agree with Aitch though, in terms of the tone of some posts. That is what I was trying (unsuccessfully) to articulate.

You don't 'graduate' from early testing to 'sensible' testing. You either know you can balance the anxiety/excitement or you don't.

I am a hardcore early tester!!

<<flexes muscles>>

TheHedgeWitch Thu 24-Apr-08 11:33:41

Message withdrawn

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now