To think its a bit weird they are using the name already?

[LolaBellsAllTheWay]

Sil is 23 weeks pregnant with a boy (as told at 20 week scan). The ils were at ours for dinner yesterday and she is refering to the baby by the chosen name, as is mil and other sil.

I just find this a bit weird. When i was pregnant with dds we knew both times and although we had names we didn't use them incase they didn't suit it, or the scan was wrong.

It might be grating on me a little as it was our choice if dds had been ds.

I also noticed that bil wasn't using it but i know he's not entirely happy with the choice so i find it weird that sil is using it before they've agreed on it.

Is it weird?

I am 23 weeks and I'm also in the school of thought that you just don't know what's going to happen. A friend of a friend posted scan pictures on Facebook, the sex and chosen name at 20 weeks and then referred to the baby as such from then on. Thankfully the baby was fine and healthy but personally I just think it's all too much.

well, why would a high risk pregnancy get more scans in the first trimester?
What on earth could a scan possibly determine so early on? MOre to the point, how on earth could a scan help at such an early stage?
I know a woman personally, who had 3 or 4 scans in the first trimester (no complications) and went on to miscarry

In terms of scans, each to their own, but in most cases (unless you have a risk factor or insist on additional scans) the NHS only offers 2 scans at 12 and 20 weeks so don't really that they are overused.

Sakura I think if you are only going to have one scan in pregnancy would be best to have this at 20 weeks rather than 35 weeks, as more chance of it being life saving then.

In terms of name, I think its odd, for the reasons set out above, that you can't count your chickens etc. But then the friend I have who did have a stillborn did name him the name they planned and refers to him by this name when she talks about what happened.

But then I also think its odd that people rush out and buy stuff for the baby from as early as 12-16 weeks - to me that much more odd than calling it by a name.

YABU.

You are just not happy because they have taken 'your' name.

We are using our DDs name (I am 33 weeks), to get DS used to the idea and we used DS's name before he was born. I like it, it helps me bond with the baby inside and makes it more 'real'. It isn't an 'it', she is xxxxxx. Even if something awful did happen, she would still be who she is and if it turned out to be a boy, then we would just change it.

sakura, scans in early ptegnancy are invaluable. if you have the references to back up your claims, I would really like to see them. otherwise I have to say that you are talking utter bollocks. as trillian says, the link between complications is there because high risk pgs get more scans. if I ever get up the pole again I will have scans every 10-14 days until 12w, then scans every month. If Id had a recommended scan at 38w then my situation re fertility would have been very different. scans save lives. its as simple as that.

re calling baby by its given name before birth, I had a horrendous pg with ds and I was grateful to have a name to call him. it helped me focus on the fact that it was a little boy. our little boy. not a thing making me sick and keeping me in and out of hospital.

the only thing you need to be concerned about in the first trimester, from a practical POV, is diet (checking blood pressure, urine, basic tests)
Dating scans are nothing but trouble as well. They are often way off and are not as accurate as a woman's own dates. (fair enough if she as no idea as to when she conceived, but again, I think the "due date" is very arbitrary. In some countries 39 weeks is full-term, in other countries 42 weeks- that's almost a whole month difference)

You link to me the benefits of early scans

They are not invaluable, and in the first trimester, they are of practically no value

"What on earth could a scan possibly determine so early on? MOre to the point, how on earth could a scan help at such an early stage?"

These are all people I know PERSONALLY - I'm sure others can give examples.

friend 1: twins diagnosed at 12 weeks, in same sac, no membrane. Pregnancy monitored very carefully, delivered by CS at 32 weeks now healthy 5 year olds, before ultrasound the prognosis would have very poor indeed (ie they both would have died in utero, would have got tangled in each others cords)

friend 2: missed abortion diagnosed at 12 weeks, scan saved her carrying around dead baby for weeks longer

friend 3: molar pregnancy diagnosed at 12 weeks, scan prevented cancer etc

friend 4: ectopic pregnancy diagnosed at 6 week scan.

Obviously lots of scans for random bleeding early in pregnancy is not going to help matters, and could perhaps make things worse. Once one scan has ruled out molar/ectopic etc no point in having any more.

My Aunty did this. Its still fun to call my female cousin "Baby Neil" sometimes. Poor Aunty - she was convinced!

We just called DS 'the baby'. Although I pretended he could talk to me and express opinions about the outside world in order to annoy DP and help me get my own way

No opinion on right or wrong. People should do what makes them feel good about the pregnancy.

fuck off sakura, Ive had 12 miscarriages and an ectopic pregnancy, as well as one ds. early scans determine whether the pregnancy is viable, whether the pregnancy is in the right place, whether it is molar (cancerous) or whether there are genetic abnormalities. do me a favour, pop over to the mc board and ask them how having a scan in early pg affected them.

Hear hear Lissie.

Sakura You are scaremongering. There is no evidence that early scans lead to more miscarriages, none at all.

The lefthandedness thing is a very minor increase and only applies to those who had those 3d 'vanity' scans where people want a photograph of their child's face in utero.

Please don't worry people unnecessarily.

MUmNWLondon,
I do think scans have their place, but I think they are way way overused.
There is no reason for a woman to have multiple scans in the first trimester (one will suffice, and follow up ones if a problem is found, a pathological pregnancy
But pathology is not the norm and I think people are scan-happy

Scans don'T cure anything, and nobody knows the effects, so my point is they should be used sparingly, and I do think the unnaturalness of looking into the womb can't be underestimated, because I think some women do feel bonded to the baby, as a result of scans, and I wonder how natural this situation is,

oh, and having an early scan (at around 6w) saved my life. I had no typical signs of an ep even though my tube had ruptured. it also showed tissue remnants in 2 of my mc's and probably saved my ds's life because of threatened mc, not helped in the slightest by carrying on as normal. some people do not go through pregnancy easily, some do need intervention. you are lucky if you dont, but dont tell me that its a waste of time/resources.

I used DS1's name from the 20w scan when we knew he was a boy. The problem was by the time he was born he didnt look like the baby I had pictured in my head. It took me a good few weeks to match the xxx in my head to the xxx in front of me.

DS2 we had his name picked out from when we found he was a boy too. However, this time we referred to him as "Baby E" so when he came (we had three choices all beginning with E) we could pick the one that suited him. That worked a lot better.

YABU, if it works for them and they are excited then leave them to it.

Nope I do not find it wierd. At 19w6d I was rushed to hospital with suspected early labour/ pre eclampsia which turned out to be a kidney infection. I found out whilst in DS was a DS, as they scanned to check he was OK. After thinking I was losing him we named him and referred to him as his name after that.

He is still called that at 6.4!!

The last 2 of my 3 dc we found out what they were before they were here and as soon as the scan operator told us her thoughts thats what they became known as ......indeed with ds3 i was booked for a c section at 10am and ds1&2 were in school the headteacher spoke about ds3 by name in her assembly and they all prayed for xaviers safe arrival.

Its lovely to give a bump a name imo.

*xavier is not ds3s real name .

wewish
don't tell me to fuck off. I think these this is an important issue. I'm not scaremongering, it's something I feel strongly about. Scans have their place, I've never said they don't. I've said they're overused, wantonly

A quick google, I clicked on the first link that came up:

"Although most doctors are very unconcerned about the safety of this, many in the "alternative" birth community are greatly concerned about the safety implications of this much ultrasound. Because there is limited information on this issue, this FAQ will focus more on the ultrasound scans commonly used in pregnancy for prenatal diagnosis (B-scans). However, considering the amounts of ultrasound women experience through Doptones during their routine check-ups, and the hours and hours they are exposed to with EFM during labor, it is an issue ripe for MUCH more exploration"

Most practitioners consider ultrasounds perfectly safe, and strongly dismiss the concerns of anyone who questions this. However, there is a small but vocal minority of critics that contend that ultrasound safety is unproven and should be approached with more caution.

These critics oppose routine ultrasound with no clear indications for use, and generally believe that ultrasounds should only be used when their potential benefits clearly outweigh any potential risks. Other critics are not opposed to one routine ultrasound during pregnancy but are leery of the vastly increased number of ultrasounds being done today, especially with today's more powerful machines.

The point is that there are still safety concerns over ultrasound use, particularly with the newer technology. While there is no "smoking gun" set of studies that prove beyond a reasonable doubt that ultrasound is unsafe, there are still many questions that remain to be answered. Some caution seems to be prudent.

link

well that's the safety aspect, but this thread is not about that.

I also have personal reservations about scans being overused for emotional reasons. I think there's something unnatural about looking into the womb, and that's why I think prudence should be used when it comes to scans. BUt lets be honest, these days scans are used willy-nilly

yanbu because the husband doesn't like the name so it sounds a bit manipulative as she is using it to get him accustomed to the idea when he doesn't agree.

Yabu as it is their business unless they are telling you to call it by x if referring to the baby

You sound a little jealous and bitter about the name use?

Sakura I had heavy bleeding week nine due to a blood clot that scan told me that the baby was alive, seeing that heartbeat on the screen brought home to me the responsibility I had to slow down and take it easy for that little life.

Some parents choose to terminate due to defects shown in early scans I wouldn't but it would be helpful to know and prepare myself and manage my expectations if something did show up as different to the norm. But I'm sure you have an opinion on this too.

i will say exactly what i want. you have said that early scans shouldnt be given out, clearly based on my own experience i feel that they should. you have quoted that MOST practioners say that scans are perfectly safe. but there is a MINORITY that feels that they are unproven. so who do we listen to? the minority or the majority? you have a non-argument. there is evidence all over these boards of how important early scans are, please link to the evidence that they cause damage.

the point is, in many cases such as an ep/mmc it isnt known whether it is a safetly issue until it is too late.

With reference to the scan - lefthandedness brain damage thing. I live somewhere where they scan you at every appointment and 3d scans as par for the course. So this news shook me up a bit!

Anyway, for anyone else who is a bit bothered, I had a look and found that this study has been critisised. As the info was gathered in the 1970's, scan machines were more powerful and dangerous than they are now. Also, to get a scan back then you already had to have a bit of a suspect pregnancy so there is a stronger likelihood of a scanned pregnancy resulting in a baby with issues. Overall, they (Professors, doctors etc.) are saying that its potentially interesting but not conclusive.

So, I wait and see if DS is left-handed, theres a 9% chance of it based on the fact that he has 2 right-handed parents!