AIBU to wonder if earlier generations really viewed early miscarriages differently?

[KitKat1985]

Just interested in garnering opinions on this really. I have debated whether to post this at all as I'm aware the subject matter is a sensitive one for a lot of people, so I've tried to really clear in the title that it's a thread about early miscarriages so those who don't want to read the whole post don't have to. But it's a conversation that really got me wondering recently so wanted to hear some views on it. I had a conversation recently with some women who were from a previous generation (think late 50's onwards). They basically said that back when they were having babies you weren't even really considered to be pregnant until you had missed two periods (so I guess would be about 8 weeks). They said they may have had occasions whereby they were late etc, but if they bled before the '2 missed period' mark they said they just put it down as 'one of those things', and were a bit dismissive about people in this generation who would report being really upset because they were having a miscarriage when it was very early on in their pregnancy. They also said that these days because of early sensitivity tests etc, people often consider themselves to be pregnant sometimes before their period is even late, which in their opinion was wrong and just led to a lot more heartbreak if things then didn't progress well. I'm wondering if they're telling the whole truth or not about how previous generations viewed early miscarriages. I can't completely believe that in a previous generation women didn't also feel a bit devastated if they started bleeding after they were late, and therefore must have probably also worked out that they were having an early pregnancy loss. I can to some extent sympathise with their theory though that testing really early can lead to more heartache. Do you think early miscarriages really were viewed differently a generation ago? Or do you think it was just more a taboo subject and if women were very upset about early losses they were just under societal pressure not to say it?

Do you think early miscarriages really were viewed differently a generation ago? Or do you think it was just more a taboo subject and if women were very upset about early losses they were just under societal pressure not to say it?

Just to summerise your question

From observations about my DM and my grandmothers attitudes i would say that as far as early miscarriages go i think often they were genuinely less likely to believe they were 'truly pregnant' until a few weeks later than we do now. However on the subject of late loss and infant death i think the 'must keep a stiff upper lip' attitude applied. Very very sadly.

I aught to add - my DM was born in '37 and my GMs were born around the turn of the century. So a lot older than 'late 50s'.

I am of that generation and I agree to a certain extent. It's down to how much you wanted to be pregnant though in the first place that determines how you would have felt. Any loss is devastating no matter what generation you come from. I remember being told by older relatives that at 12 weeks it was early days yet and not to get too excited.

I think it’s probably a bit of both, sometimes they probably genuinely didn’t know they were pregnant so didn’t know they had a pregnancy to lose, plenty of women have periods a week or two late occasionally. There definitely was a sense that it wasn’t something that should be talked about too, my Granny had a couple of later miscarriages and definitely have a sense that she shouldn’t talk about them, she has talked about them more in recent years, one was late enough that she knew the sex. A great aunt on the other side of my family had a term stillbirth and my Granny (her SIL) was told never to mention it to her, so she didn’t, she just carried on as normal although she knew it didn’t feel right and apologised to her years later, we only recently found out from burial records that the baby was buried with Granny’s father who had died a couple of years before.

Well I think if they hadn't seen a positive pregnancy test / been told they were pregnant by a doctor then it wouldn't be real in their mind so they wouldn't feel the loss as much.

My Mum born in 40s said you didn't even go to the Drs until you'd missed 3 periods. I think there was far less media pressure around then, less belief of getting a positive pregnancy test and that meant having a healthy baby at the end of it. So just more general awareness and acceptance that things did go wrong.

No less heart breaking though.

I do remember my Mum's comment about her SILs stillbirth striking me as insensitive even as an 8ish year old. Something about trying again as soon as possible

I kinda agree with your friend. I've never considered myself pregnant until 2 months. I've missed earlier, and honestly, I wasn't too upset at all. I did lose one at 9 weeks which was a bit horrid, but otherwise it IS one of those things. So many people miscarry. Most women I know have. Most have gone on to have a healthy baby. :)

scurry - I remember being told by older relatives that at 12 weeks it was early days yet and not to get too excited.

Same here. My mother told me not to tell anyone before the 15 week point ''just in case''. In case of what i was never sure exactly. In case things go wrong i guess. But thinking about it i'm not sure who's feelings you're trying to spare in that scenario by having not told anyone in the first place ...

sorry - rambling :)

My mum (mid 50s) said pretty much the same, not that miscarriages were treated differently, more that because HPTs weren't as readily available that it was only really losses that happened from 8+ weeks onwards that were routinely picked up.

That would have been in the 80s so hardly ye olden dayes.

I've had heavy implantation bleeding with all of my pregnancies so without HPTs I would have suspected pregnancy until many weeks further in.

Saying that I also had a mmc at 11 weeks (pregnancy was dated as 6 weeks) and there was no way I could have mistaken it as a heavy period.

For various reasons I didn't do a test until I was 6 weeks pregnant. I had just come off the pill and used to have long cycles. I was pretty convinced I was pregnant but didn't know for definite. I guess if I had lost it really early I would never have known for definite. I imagine there is a bit of a difference between thinking 'ooh maybe!' and then having a bleed versus taking a test, dating accurately etc. However often miscarriages are clearly that and I'm sure women were upset. I wonder if it wasn't so acceptable to share those emotions. As a PP said, it probably depends on circumstances and other factors e.g. how convinced you were that you were pregnant.

Early miscarriages- yes. You wouldn't tell anyone you were pregnant until three months gone, ' just in case'. It was a very generally accepted thing to do, almost as if saying earlier would jinx it.

But I think what perhaps they were trying to explain, was that they really just didn't know if they were pregnant, or just late at 5-8 weeks, because really early testing wasn't available, and home tests were generally expensive, and not reliable until later. Most people are a bit late now and then, so there was no way to know you were pregnant back then, if you had a period after say 6-7 weeks. Being upset then, about a late period, would be like someone nowadays being upset when their period arrived on time, because they believed they had conceived, then lost the foetus, in the 2 weeks from ovulation to period - in both cases its possible, but no one knows for sure if there was a pregnancy, so would seem a bit Ott to be upset?

The early, accurate tests we have now change this completely of course, and its understandable that people are upset when they know they have lost a pregnancy very early.

My mother was told not to go to the doctors for a pregnancy test until she had missed two periods. This was back in the early 1970s so I suppose they didn't really acknowledge a pregnancy until they were at least 8-10 weeks pregnant. And there was a strong belief from my grandmothers generation (according to her she is 87 years old) in the saying that 'it wasn't meant to be or its natures way of getting rid of something that wasn't quite right' they just seemed to accept it.

I think society in general is more aware of things and acknowledges more things now than it did years ago.

My mil pondered a while ago whether miscarriages happened more nowadays. She then accepted that the increased awareness of early pregnancy was more likely to be the cause. She then said that she did know of women who lost pregnancies but it wasn’t talked about and you were simply expected to just get on with it.

My granny used to trot out that “you couldn’t miss what you had never had”

I agree these early tests are pointless. What is the point of detecting you have conceived before the pregnancy is established. Utterly pointless and meaningless, and quite self indulgent really. So unnecessary.

They basically said that back when they were having babies you weren't even really considered to be pregnant until you had missed two periods (so I guess would be about 8 weeks).
What a load of bollocks! We had sticks to pass on in those days too you know, and I can assure you that I was fully aware that I was pregnant when I had my two early miscarriages, back in those old dark ages. Still heartbroken about them more than 30 years later.

Interesting question!
I agree with this:
on the subject of late loss and infant death i think the 'must keep a stiff upper lip' attitude applied

My grandmother, born in 1941 suffered a succession of early miscarriages and a stillbirth at term in the late 60s and early 70s, and she is very much of the 'least said soonest mended' attitude, even now after all these years, which is sad.

My other gradmother, born in 1952 suffered an early miscarriage in the early 70s and all she didn't ever discuss it. When my Dsis was pregnant with her first in 2009 all she would say about it was 'you shouldn't count your chickens before they're hatched'

My mum, born in 1972, had an early miscarriage in 1998 and was openly devastated, and still talks about it sadly now.

I don't know whether thesee anecdotes illustrate your theory, but it certainly is an interesting idea.

My mum (pregnant in the 70's) said dr didn't want to see you until you had a missed period.
Tbh my mc at 11 weeks was a much more traumatic event than my other one at 6 weeks both psychologically and physically. Both were whilst in the throws of infertility so same awful context.

A lot of women had irregular periods and so even GPs wouldn’t have tested until at least 3 periods were missed. My gran grew up in the British colonies and over there the GP wouldn’t even try to diagnose a pregnancy until after 5 weeks. But remember even after a baby’s birth, mums were told not to get their hopes up - most kids died before their first birthdays back then.

I'm mid 50's and hpt's were pretty accurate when I was having kids. You could test within a day or so of missing a period. I think it might have been the case for older women or women of my age who had kids in their early 20's (I had my first at 33) that they didn't know they were pregnant until later on.

When I had my first you didn't o to a doctor's until you had missed 2 periods and then it took a week to get the results so even if you were on the ball you didn't find out until you were 9 weeks pregnant and if you had a miscarriage during that time you would assume that you'd just missed a period and that was that.

Now we knew my DD was pregnant with her latest the day her period was due (and not just because she was dashing to the loo every 5 minutes)

I'm sure the time lapse does affect how we feel about miscarriage as for so many years it wasn't obvious what had happened

I think it's right that early losses were considered more normal and likely. We do have an expectation these days that everything will be fine just because we've had a positive test, which can be misleading. I think it's the same about getting pregnant - people being worried when it hasn't happened within 3 months!

But I don't think it would have been less upsetting as such. Perhaps less unexpected but if you'd been trying for a while and knew you were having signs you'd still be devastated for it not to work out.

Things have changed with the availability of very early pregnancy tests. Before that you had no idea you were pregnant so early and if a pregnancy ended in a miscarriage, you probably didn't even know.

It's progress but things aren't always for the best.

Greenshoots1 Mon 01-Jan-18 19:51:52 -I agree these early tests are pointless.

The earlier a woman begins taking supplements to help her growing baby the better. So it's not pointless to know early.

I agree these early tests are pointless. What is the point of detecting you have conceived before the pregnancy is established. Utterly pointless and meaningless, and quite self indulgent really. So unnecessary

I was requested by my consultant to start testing immediately I was even a day late as I would have needed additional help to remain pregnant.