AIBU to worry about my sister’s pregnancy risks at 46?

Maybe its a newish thing then. I'm talking 16 years ago!

Not sure you had the typical GTT test then - as that usually is two blood tests first after fasting second after having sugar - it's the one described on NHS website.

I think they do check urine for sugar but think that was more routinely when they checked for proteins as well - but more routine care and the GTT test is usual way to test for gestaional diabetes and for me GTT has always been part of a hospital clinic being run not done in a normal MW clinic or visit.

It's an arse if you have other kids and limited childcare having to hang round hospital for couple of hours and have blood drawn but worth it to rule out a treatable potential dangerous condition for most women dependent on their risk factors.

I think i had to drink it in advance and then pee'd on a stick at the midwife clinic but I might be mis remembering as it was a looong time ago but there was defo no blood test and then another blood test.

This comes across as less worried more judgemental. As is often the case where people want to dress up judgement so they themselves avoid judgement.

she knows what she’s doing, she’s made informed decisions. They are her decisions nor yours.

You fast overnoight - nothing but water.

Issue for me as like coffee in morning and fasting trigger morning sickness even then. It was a sugary drink as lucozade now sugar free - but you go in they draw blood give you small sugar drink and you wait round till the draw next bit of blood.

Dh had to take time off for later two - as couldn't have kids in hopsital and needed to sit still.

I don't know anyone who had test who had any phycial issues with it either.

The OP sis still has right to refuse any tests she chooses - just this one rules out a birth complication that if picked up can be fairly easily managed to help prevent negative outcomes for mother and baby. Op Dsis should have access to MW and GP so has access to medical support and advice.

It may be she is doing it but hasn't told OP - my own family made a huge fuss insiting it meant I had diabtetes and refused to listen that test was negative - so weren't told about later two tests. Even if Op think she is hiding her worry it may have been picked up and this is a way to just not engage with it.

Bloody phone!!

vommited not commuted obviously!!

I agree, I've known plenty of people who've had it & none of them commuted or shat themselves!

I think your experience is normal!!

Yes if you look back at my comment re abortion you’ll see the exact quote I was replying to and it will make more sense.
I find in a county particularly where abortion is legal it is strange to call any home birth irresponsible. Women make the decision for a home birth weighing up the risks and benefits, just because they don’t weigh them up the same as you or I would doesn’t make them ‘irresponsible’ they should still have bodily autonomy at the end of the day shouldn’t they or is that just for women seeking abortions? Yes I would be very concerned if for example a woman had grade 4 placenta praevia or accreta wanted a homebirth and professionals may want to ensure if she had the capacity to make that decision but in most other circumstances it’s less clear cut when also taking account of the psychological risks to the mother of not having a homebirth

I also drank some lucozade and then went for my appt, I dont remember fasting, but maybe it was in the morning, and then I walked to work and carried on with my day. No drama at all.

The gestational diabetes test is no big deal.

i think it's sensible to do it. If invited to.

@Nordicdaydream I don't know why your sister wouldn't have the GD test.

but I can understand her not having the NIPT, if she wouldn't abort what's the point?

lots of women have babies around her age & yes the risks are higher, but not inevitable! Try to relax & help her enjoy her pregnancy! Do what you can/are willing to help her (especially in this heatwave - if you're in it!)
I hope it goes well for her 🌷💕

I think you're mixing something someone else said and something I said together.

A home birth would be irresponsible if the baby was known to have Downs though, and avoiding prenatal testing with the purpose of delivery not knowing so as not to affect decisions about the birth would be too!

Hopefully she's having her ultrasound anomaly testing at least!

What a load of cobblers.

I get the point of being prepared for a child who may have issues but my reply was in the context of you indicating that she needed to know if she was carrying a baby with downs just in case she couldn’t make the necessary’ provisions in case anything ever happened to her. If theoretically she was carrying a baby with down’s and she couldn’t guarantee someone who could step in her place, what exactly were you indicating she should do then?
As for a home birth, no woman is declined a homebirth (unless no staff to cover the service) but are advised if it would be outside of medical guidance, which at 46 it would be.
Of course the whole point of screening, GTTs, scans etc is to optimise outcomes but it is still the woman’s choice and has to be respected and she may have her own logically sound reasons for that. Just like it is when an adult decides care at any other time or indeed when a women decides on an abortion

I know people who have had straightforward pregnancies and healthy babies at 45,46. There is no point being tested for Down syndrome if she knows she will continue with the pregnancy. She’s entitled to accept or decline care, not a great deal you can do.

She probably declined the test as she wouldn't get rid of it if it came back high risk of downs syndrome. That's completely her choice and a perfectly valid one. Your sister is a fully grown woman and can make her own decisions. If she had a baby fairly healthily at 40, I don't see why she wouldn't at 46 if she in good health already?

I’m near 45 and 38 weeks pregnant doing marvellous so far fingers crossed so I don’t think you need to be so worried unless there’s a specific reason to

There is no way to say this without causing irreparable damage.
However you dress it up, this would be saying to your sister that she must have an invasive test and abort a child who had Down's syndrome because you don't want to be stuck looking after them if she died!
This would not be a conversation you could come back from so I'd seriously advise not thinking along those lines at all. Every decision we make has the potential to affect our families lives but we have to live in the assumption that things largely turn out okay.

No. I would rather (and have) monitored my blood sugar levels at home over a week or two when it was clinically indicated to be necessary. This gives a much better picture of what’s actually going on and avoids the logistical and physical difficulties of the GTT.

It's more important that she has the glucose tolerance test, but there's a strong argument that it's better to be prepared if your baby has Downs - a significant percentage of babies with Trisomy 21 need multiple surgeries in their first year, and after that early intervention in the form of physiotherapy, occupational therapy and speech therapy significantly increases the chances of a high quality of life.
Heart defects and other congenial anomaly will hopefully be spotted by ultrasound, assuming she's not declining that too, so it's personal choice whether to test specifically, but you wouldn't want a home birth (which she won't get at 46 anyway) or a midwife led unit to deliver a baby with Downs because of the very high chance (not inevitable, but high chance) they'll need neonatal ICU.

My aunt had a stillbirth due to undiagnosed gestational diabetes, before the testing was available. She also had major complications during delivery of the baby due to his very large size, also caused by the diabetes.

Has she explained why she doesn’t want the test? If it’s logistics or it not being very ‘nice’ she might be persuaded with an offer of support to attend?

My worry would be that she’s being influenced by social media where there are a small but vocal group encouraging women to decline most medical care, without really explaining the risks.
I don’t think medics are great at explaining the risks and benefits either, admittedly, leaving women in an impossible position unable to make a truly informed choice!

You're not filling your body with sugar. I had to drink a tiny bottle of liquid that apparently contained the same amount of sugar as a large apple, just very concentrated so it's easier to get down. You do the fasting overnight & have the test in the morning so you only need to skip breakfast. The worst of it is sitting around for 2 hours waiting to see how you've processed the sugar.

GD is bloody dangerous and as a previous poster said, can lead to lifelong type 1 diabetes. I've never heard of anyone vomiting and crapping themselves but even that would be a better alternative. You're the one talking shite on this I'm afraid.

I had DS2 at 45 after several early miscarriages and a ruptured tube due to ectopic pregnancy. The pregnancy was uneventful, apart from nausea that lasted throughout and severe acid reflux. Pretty standard for some regardless of age, even if hugely uncomfortable. The birth was quick and straightforward (same as DS1) and all was fine. Complications are statistically more common but absolutely not inevitable. I understand why you would worry, but it won’t change the outcome.

No point worrying. My sis did same. All well

My husband who is now 58 was conceived when his mum was 49 and was born and has obviously grown up with no problems 🥰

I refused the downs screening and a glucose tolerance test in my pregnancies. I didn’t care if my child had downs, so it was pointless to me. i refused GTT because I had HG very badly and fasting for that long whilst also having 3 small children was more than i could face. my doctor agreed with me that we could moniter things in other ways. All was fine.