Would you like to be a member of our research panel? Join here - there's (nearly) always a great incentive offered for your views.

Do modern women worry more?

(21 Posts)
Aximillian Sat 18-Jul-15 18:58:37

It's just a query that I've suddenly thought about - did your mum, when she was pregnant, worry about MC? I don't think mine even thought about it much, 30 years ago when she had me. I'm 10 weeks along now and, as a first timer, I'm thinking about it almost every day.

I wonder if the rise in MC (caused by being aware of pregnancy much earlier because of home pregnancy tests) has contributed to this? Or was MC talked about as frequently and my mother was just super chilled about it? Just a musing that I wondered if we could ask our mums about...

Artandco Sat 18-Jul-15 19:05:11

I didn't really. With both I didn't confirm pregnancies until 16-20 weeks. Can't see the point at 2-3 weeks people do, there's nothing to do or see at that point anyway. Unless it's unwanted pregnancy surely confirming baby makes no difference as baby will still be arriving at the same time.

With ds1 I thought I might be but was busy working abroad and so didn't check until 16 weeks. With ds2 he was born a year later so pregnant within a few months of first so just assumed any odd symptoms as from last baby. Confirmed at 21 weeks.

Both times was great as then 'being officially pregnant' and noticing was actually quite short

curlii103 Sat 18-Jul-15 19:38:17

Definitely.....information and all that. Every time I sneeze I thinks it's flu like symptoms snd have therefore caught listeria ..or damaged her nervous system by eating too much tuna+

0x530x610x750x630x79 Sat 18-Jul-15 19:45:09

People didn't tell anyone (well in my circles) about their pregnancy till 12 weeks just in case of miscarriage.

mayaknew Sat 18-Jul-15 19:49:19

I didn't worry about miscarriage with my first two . But for some reason I am this time . I think it may be because I have a boisterous toddler who keeps jumping all over me and lifting and carrying a lot so I'm very aware of the knocks I'm getting .

I would have thought they worried about it more years ago . With research and modern medicine we know what to avoid and how to deal with particular complications . Whereas in years before women didn't have all this information and risks were much higher .

twinsandapenguin Sat 18-Jul-15 20:52:43

I think a lot of it is down to having reliable tests easily available. They just didn't have this in my Mum's day. Plus people are a lot more informed these days

scatterbrainedlass Sat 18-Jul-15 20:54:29

I guess the risks were higher way back when, but I think the dangers of childbearing were just a fact of life. I think we expect to end up with a healthy baby as soon as we know we're pregnant. 100 years ago some women wouldn't have known they were pregnant for quite a while, and they had to face the fact that they, and/or the baby may not survive the experience. I guess they worried, but they just had to get on with it and hope for the best, unlike us who can whizz down the hospital for a scan if something doesn't feel quite right.

thatsn0tmyname Sat 18-Jul-15 20:55:52

I think that modern technology, such as the availability of scans, allows modern women to develop a reationship with an early pregnancy in a way that our mothers didn't/ couldn't.

Skiptonlass Sat 18-Jul-15 22:19:28

I'm wondering if we don't worry more, but have more forums to share on? one thing my mum has said several times is that she really wishes she'd had the knowledge resources we have now.

I think lots of stuff was just not talked about back then and unless you had a big close family women could be extremely isolated. Now it's so easy to google something (or ask MN ) and be reassured. The medical system is also much less patriarchal and rigid.

I would also imagine that exactly what we worry about has changed over time - puerperal fever isn't a massive worry these days, but it carried off huge numbers of women back in the day.

Aximillian Sun 19-Jul-15 08:29:58

Really interesting views ladies - thank you! I really value the ability to look up every little thing. I know that my mum doesn't remember everything accurately from 30 years ago, so being able to ask people you've never met about those niggles is really valuable.

For me, confirming pregnancy when you suspect was important as I wanted to make sure I was eating the right things/not drinking, etc. I found out after my honeymoon & was suddenly extremely pleased we hadn't gone scuba diving!

0x530x610x750x630x79 Sun 19-Jul-15 22:31:39

There is more health advice now, faff around eating and drinking, some sensible some less so (fags vs brie)

GuybrushThreepwoodMP Mon 20-Jul-15 08:06:21

We have google now. My mum didn't know about all the things that could go wrong, but I do.
It's difficult because we now know about those things so it makes sense to educate yourself in order to try and prevent them. But yes, I think it makes us worry more.

mrschatty Mon 20-Jul-15 08:16:34

I think modern women can be more 'self indulgent' and worry about a lot of things our family didn't before- we did some family research and my great great grandmother had 13 surviving children- 4 that we know died after birth. Probably a few miscarriages. Her husband was a miner and she used the local steamie (wash house) once a week for cleaning the family clothes. Her life must have been so so tough. Me and my mum often think of her as we load the dishwasher and run the hoover around. With all her pregnancies she probably had no time to think about it until the birth!

totallybewildered Mon 20-Jul-15 08:18:20

most conceptions don't lead to a baby, so it is utterly pointless to find out early if you have conceived. This is not the same as having started a viable pregnancy. I know this sounds harsh, but I do get bored of listening to people going on and on and on about their "heartbreaking" "chemical" pregnancies. every woman in history has had them, but ignored them. There is just no need to even detect them.

On another level, this generation is just extreme K, which means we have far fewer children, than other populations in other circumstances, and invest far more into each one. A few generations ago, there was much less care taken over individual children, more died, but there were more to start with, so it balanced out.

In some cultures pregnancy is not acknowledged at all, and a baby is not celebrated until it is 100 days old!

hesterton Mon 20-Jul-15 08:34:09

32 years ago we usually had one pregnancy book, maybe 2 if you were a worrier. They were our bibles and were consulted daily. We couldn't confirm pregnancies until 6 or 7 weeks. As another poster mentioned, ot was often kept secret until 12 weeks. Made easier as we were allowed and even encouraged to have an occasional glass of wine but ciggies were an absolute no-no by then. I don't recall any restrictions around foods including cheeses. Tinned oily fish was deemed brain food for baby so I had it about 3 times a week. It wasn't miscarriage we feared so much as cot death which I think was more common then. We were doing the new fangled thing of sleeping our babies on their sides instead of on their tummies as our mums had done. There was a huge fear that if the baby rolled onto his back even for a second, he would choke to death so we rolled Terry nappy squares and padded them down the babe's back so he couldn't roll from his side to his back.

You still had a compulsory enema and shave of the public area before giving birth in some hospitals, and it was more usual to give birth with your legs in stirrups to make it easier for the hospital staff.

Other things we were scared of was germs, sterilising everything the baby touched for months. A bit of dirt would have done them good!

Natural childbirth was the big thing and you did feel a failure if you had any intervention - not by the midwives but by your nct group! This was in trendy North London and hopefully didn't spread too far across the country.

MuffMuffTweetAndDave Mon 20-Jul-15 08:41:05

I wouldn't presume we worry more, but of course we're more aware of very early miscarriage now thanks to improved technology. People have a range of different reactions to that.

Eminybob Mon 20-Jul-15 09:05:02

I know my mum did.
She had an early miscarriage and a premature birth which resulted in the baby dying just a couple of days old.

This was all around 40 years ago before my brother and I were born. My brother was premature and she went into premature labour with me which they managed to stop and I was born just a few weeks early.

I don't think my mum would have stopped worrying thoughout both those pregnancies.

I don't think it's anything to do with the times we live in, I think it's about personal experience. I had an early miscarriage and was shocked when it happened as I wasn't expecting it and was all happy and carefree. While I was pregnant with DS I worried constantly.

MassRollouts Mon 20-Jul-15 09:13:21

My mother worries about everything. I don't think miscarriage was one of them, though.

I worried a little because I have PCOS. This is the first and only time I have ever been (knowingly) pregnant after 7 years of taking no precautions with my partner.
I found out at about 7 weeks. I thought I was just having a late period that was taking it's time to appear. I've gone a few months without one before so it wasn't new. My fiance insisted on taking a test just to be sure.

Needless to say, I was not expecting it. I think I worried up until my first scan and now at 29 weeks I've had a pretty easy problem-free pregnancy. She's a resilient active little thing.

geekymommy Mon 20-Jul-15 23:33:01

If they did talk about the possibility of miscarriage, it probably wasn't in an environment like this or other Internet forums, where every discussion gets saved for posterity. It would have been in face to face conversations or maybe letters, which might be forgotten later.

With fewer pregnancy books and no Google, you don't get new information every time you go looking for information on miscarriage, so there's less incentive to do it.

EdgarAllenPoe Tue 21-Jul-15 13:29:59

I think it's twofold.

Firstly, people would have only realised they were pregnant a number of weeks later on. No early testing was available, if there was testing at all. So an early miscarriage at 5 or 6 weeks may not have even been noticed, so certainly not worried about.

Secondly, information and statistics on any topic is just a google search away, so we're all a lot more aware of the risk. I could tell you my % risk of miscarriage and how it went down as each day ticked along. My mother definitely could not. She had no idea how common miscarriage actually is. Ignorance can sometimes be bliss.

chelle792 Tue 21-Jul-15 13:56:17

I had a chat with my Mum about miscarriage earlier because she's really anxious that I might miscarry. She said that in her day you wouldn't really consider pregnancy until your period was two or three weeks late. I guess that means you are not going to detect chemical pregnancies.

She keeps telling me I'm in the danger zone until I'm 16 weeks hmm

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