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?

Yes, my DM told me that in the 60s she and friends didn't go to the doctor until about 2/3 missed periods just in case. She said the phrase was "See if the pregnancy we take".

@XmasInTintagel you're quite right. I had a pregnancy test give me a positive result. Subsequent tests were negative except for maybe the faintest of lines. Four weeks I spent driving myself mad, taking tests and even pestering the doctor (which I now feel utterly ashamed of wasting the doctors time) before I got a period that confirmed what I should have already known - I wasn't pregnant.

I'll never know if it was a dodgy test or the briefest of a liaison between sperm and egg. It doesn't matter because neither was a pregnancy.

will take

My DDs are 17 and 13 and I didn't tell anyone apart from DH until 12 weeks both times.

Advances in medicine/ testing etc have changed things massively as well though. Up until relatively recently you wouldn't have had scans, or have 'seen' your baby. You wouldn't have known whether you were having a boy or a girl etc. I think these things mean that women have a chance to bond earlier with their babies than they maybe could've in the past.

My first child was born in 1984 and I used a home test which was a test tube type, you added urine and waited a couple of hours. There was a brown circle in the bottom of the tube if positive. You had to be six weeks (two weeks late). They had been available for a few years by then I think. By the time my daughter was born in 88 the stick type tests were available, and so were the ovulation sticks although they were very expensive.
I had a miscarriage at 11 weeks before my eldest, I remember it as physically traumatic and sad. I started spotting quite soon after my positive test with my next pregnancy and remember thinking it was all going wrong again. I had a scan and the woman didn't tell me it was fine, she made me wait outside for nearly an hour for the doctor to come and speak to me. She could have shown me the screen. He'd sent me over to the imaging dept with 'probable missed abortion' on the paperwork. I think some things have improved a lot, but on the other hand some expectations have become unrealistic. It must be very rare that extremely early confirmation of pregnancy can make any difference to the outcome, and for the rest I'm not sure it's helpful to count so called chemical pregnancies as losses, it's such a common occurrence. I think the main beneficiaries are the test manufacturers, and a lot of extra upset and disappointment is the result. My mother and grandmother's generations were perhaps more pragmatic about this. My Mum told me that she went to the doctor after two missed periods for confirmation, but obviously after you missed one you'd pretty much know.

Every generation thinks they invented sex. And it appears they think they invented grief as well.......

People did have very different attitudes at different times in the past. 100 years ago, for example, infant mortality was still very high - the practice of having many children as "spares" was still relatively common. There was also a greater general acceptance of illness and death as a "fact of life", where today we are used to so many illnesses and health problems being easily treatable. Our expectations are different and that does colour attitudes and beliefs for many. It's not at all to say that people didn't get upset, or grieve, when children died, people contracted incurable illnesses or they suffered a miscarriage, just that is was common, almost expected and accepted that there was nothing that could be done about it. (Now that medical science can do so much, it is little wonder that we feel frustrated by what it cannot yet do).

However I also agree with those who think we may be mixing our generation up a little. Women who are in their 50s now were having babies 20-30 years ago, which really wasn't the dark ages! Home pregnancy tests weren't widely used in the 80s (although taking a urine sample to the local chemist and waiting a day for the results was very common). I think possibility people's feelings around miscarriage in the latter part of the last century didn't necessarily differ that much from the feelings of the day, but people had far less opportunity to share those feelings with others before the advent of online communities. That is, perhaps, the biggest chnange of all.

@LostInTheTunnelOfGoats the second and third trimesters are when you start to feel movement and the symptoms of pregnancy that are more than hormonal (PGP, piles, sciatica etc etc) It's the first trimester that feels abstract - as you'll find out soon!

Warning, This may be distressing.

This thread has got me thinking how different attitudes are from doctors now compared with the 1970’s.

Back then a foetus born before viability was almost dismissed, as nothing could be done for them.

I know of a particularly horrid event with a baby being born at home in the 1960’s.

Baby was approximately 6 months gestation and came early. Born asleep. The village doctor was called who confirmed that the baby was dead.

It was winter and the family had a hearty wood burner going. The doctor put the tiny body on the fire to dispose of it. The mother didn’t get to see the baby.

I might add they were in a very rural location and the GP was older, so possibly adhering to outdated practice.

I still sometimes think back to this event and wonder how the mother could ever bear to live at that address knowing what had happened. But I think times were different back then. Especially in extremely rural locations.

It was seen by the family as ‘not meant to be’, just one of those things. To me, it seems horrific.

Historically, the 20th century would also have been unusual in how it dealt with miscarriage. In the days before decent modern healthcare and birth control, miscarriage was much more dangerous (because you couldn’t have medical/surgical management or easily manage infection), and women also had many more pregnancies. So likely women would have experienced it with sisters/friends even if not themselves.

Every generation thinks they invented sex. And it appears they think they invented grief as well.......
Couldn't agree more BertrandRussell

If I miscarried at 6 weeks I would have thought it was a late period and other symptoms were a virus. I’m thinking of the 1980’s and I knew no different at that time. In my own family an aunt had many miscarriages she is now in her eighties and I have never heard them mentioned. On reflection I feel sad about that now.

TamzinGrey- completely off topic, but my dd has a pony called Cascade. Thought you might be interested........

haveacup I know, this is my second first tri doesn't feel abstract to me - I'm just so very sick all the time. I have found second and third tri to be a walk in the park compared with the first, because I feel normal again

I think you are being harsh, bertrandrussell.

I'm thinking of a woman I know who is around 8 months pregnant with a little girl, whom she has named, who has a fatal diagnosis and is expected to be stillborn or die shortly after birth.

In a bygone day none of that information would have been available. Whether or not that makes the eventual grief harder or easier to bear, I don't know. But it does certainly change the lie of the land.

People survive terrible tragedies, just because they don't speak about them, doesn't mean they don't carry the scars.

Everyone delay with loss and grief in different ways and how we show that grief is impacted by expectations of our society.

I think the fact that losses were not talked about doesn't mean that they were not felt and many people might have convinced themselves that the grief they felt was somehow misplaced.

I also think that the generations before the 50's suffered terrible losses from war, poverty and poor health care which affected how later generations shared their feelings.

Also, doctors and priests were mostly male and also had lived and seen worse... as times moved on and feelings were discussed, grief was recognised more.

When I was in my early 20s I had a very late period (4 weeks late) never tested but passed a huge clot the size of my hand.

It was only a few years ago (25 now) but honestly I didn't know I was pregnant, it was the wrong time for me to have a baby (I was still at Uni) and I wasn't with the father anyway so I think it's a good thing I lost it. I feel horrendous saying that but I think it was right I did lose it. I still don't consider it a miscarriage even though it probably was.

I have a 2.6 year old DD, I didn't know I was pregnant with until 12 weeks. I missed a period but it was common for me to do so, so I went to the doctors due to feeling exhausted and he asked me to do a HPT to rule it out before he ran further tests. I'd only graduated a few months earlier when I found out I was pregnant, but she cam along at the right time.

My mum is 55 and claims to have never have a MC, despite missing a period several times. And my late GM used to say that you weren't pregnant until you were showing, so I do wonder if she miscarried a few times but just didn't talk about it.

"People did have very different attitudes at different times in the past. 100 years ago, for example, infant mortality was still very high - the practice of having many children as "spares" was still relatively common" I don't think something being more common necessarily makes people more ok with it though. I've known people from parts of the world where infant mortality is much much higher, but people still feel deep deep grief at losing children. How could you not? I think it's wrong to think that just because something is rarer in the west/in these times that we feel more pain... I think the same is also true of miscarriages however, I do agree that you need to know you were pregnant/know you had miscarried in order to feel grief at miscarrying, and I do think that in the case of very early/chemical pregnancies people would have been less likely to know in the past. I think it's one in 4 pregnancies are chemical pregnancies these days so it's highly likely lots of people have had them and havent realized. That doesn't take away from the grief for the people who do realize however...

Hmm. I'm 57.

Pg one 7/8 weeks (92) Dr's response "did you want It" can still hear the intonation.

Pg two 17 weeks (failed placenta little boy). Attitude was v much not viable, not three consecutive losses (get on with it).

Pg three 36.5, overnight in SCBU when to midwife not realising problems with delivery. Compressed cord - DS v lucky.

Pg 4, MMC - I found this heart breaking at 12 weeks. Had been booked in, midwife had already said "has IT got the same father as your D'S, was IT planned?

Pg 5, DS2, 27 weeks, congenital heart condition not compatible with life. Health care OK. My mother told me to be grateful; DH still can't really talk about it (he'd be 21 this June), my elderly neighbour pitched up with a bottle of sherry (she had one son, then in his early 40s) she understood.

Pg 6 probably one of many at 5ish weeks, one didn't discuss).

Pg 7, dd, at term, 51 weeks after DS2. Obstetrician visited and gave a firm steer that she should be my swan song.

I knew within 24 hours of conception every time I was pg. My pgs were all on the 90s. One just didn't discuss it even then. Instant pg tests were just coming in and were £12.99 A shot.

On the whole hcps weren't in the slightest bothered or empathic. They were more concerned about being right on, finding out if you had a "partner", took drugs, subject to abuse, etc, rather than if you wanted your baby and might actually be upset at losing one.

As you all were.

Aw Cascade. We are on the same wavelength BertrandRussell

Every generation thinks they invented sex. And it appears they think they invented grief as well.......

I don't think that's quite correct.

I don't believe for a minute that grief is a new concept.

I do think we understand more about grief and the different way it can presents. It is also more socially acceptable to discuss grief. That doesn't mean to say previous generations didn't feel grief, but I don't believe for a moment they were able to discuss it as freely

It is very much a personal thing.

I know someone who had three consecutive miscarriages 35 years ago. She was described on her medical notes as 'a habitual aborter'......... She found this extremely upsetting at the time (and still does). I also know of a family member whose baby died at 6 weeks over 60 years ago. She is still mourning him and he has never been forgotten.

There was definitely not so much bereavement support available as there is now.

When I missed carried a woman I knew who was born about 1920 told me you aren’t even pregnant until you miss 3 periods, or was it 4. This same woman was very much anti-abortion and I wondered if she was okay with an abortion in the first trimester if you weren’t 'even pregnant' then.

A lot of women would miscarry and not even know it before HPT’s. Maybe they thought their over-due period was heavier and more painful; because it was so late.

MIL aged 60+ had a number of miscarriages and also lost a twin of one of her baby's. She told me that even to this day she hasn't told her parents because she didn't want them to worry - I find this very sad and hope she did have someone to comfort her at the time. I wonder if the real reason for not telling her parents was because she knew that they wouldn't know how to appropriately support her mentally or emotionally 😒