Feel weird about using the term rainbow baby

[crumble9]

Just as the title says I guess, my DD is a rainbow baby, but I find it hard to say for two reasons

It makes me sad to think she could always going to be associated with that loss. She's only 5 months but IMO frigging awesome. I want her to be special because she is special in her self.

Secondly, while what we went through was so tough for us (ovary removal, miscarriage and ectopic scare) I almost feel like there are people that go through so much more heart ache. And that me using the term undermines what they're experiencing/experienced.

But on the other hand, I don't want to airbrush out our miscarriage. It's a part of our journey, I would feel guilty not to remember.

Would you use the term? I obviously don't go round telling people, but trying for another DC often comes up at baby groups and I feel I have to explain as to why I'm nervous of trying again - when I explain they then call her a rainbow baby.

I'm going on a big holiday with the family soon, and they don't know about the miscarriage, I want to tell them but don't know how to tell them without affecting the way they see DD or feel sorry for us..

Or am I completely over thinking things

@LisaSimpsonsbff i hope i haven't upset you. It's really not about telling other people how to feel. It's just pointing out your own opinion.

As someone rightly pointed out up thread there really isn't a heirachy of grief or loss and people are entitled to feel how they feel but i do think it should be done with some sensitivity.

I have seen posts on mn where people have compared their chemicals to a later loss e.g. i've had such a terrible time ive been trying for six months and had three chemicals in a row to someone who has had an experience like mine for example. It's just about being sensitive i guess. All around.

I must admit i do often wonder too whether it is just a dodgey set of tests. I see lots of posts from people with dodgey clearblue tests that are notorious for false positives. They post pics people congratulate them and i then wonder if they think they have had a chemical a few days later when af arrives.

That being said i am not saying it isn't sad. I am not saying it didn't affect the person in question as much as they feel it did. It's all relative.

I've never been shy to mention my miscarriage but maybe because it's that I just see it as one of those things and because I wasn't particularly upset about it. It's really common for women to have miscarriages so i don't think it's an unusual thing to mention from time to time.

I hate the term; I had a late miscarriage at 18 weeks so feel I would be 'qualified' to use it if I wanted to but I think it's awful. My DS isn't a rainbow, a consolation prize or any of the other associations that I have with the term.
I know other people find it helpful and more power to them but I would never say it.

However if you want people to know about the miscarriage then that's completely valid. Just use non emotive language and explain the complicated feelings you are having. No need to label your daughter in any way.

@LisaSimpsonsbff

I was on a TTC forum where a woman was repeatedly squinting at lines that no one else could see daily and when confronting with that fact that no one else could see the lines and even she had to admit that the non existent lines were not getting darker she announced that it was ok, this baby could go and “live in the sky” with her other lost babies. She wasn’t even pregnant. I had to leave the forum at that point which was a shame as it was for quite a niche area of TTC and was otherwise quite helpful.

There seems to be a very strange competitive edge to discussing your MCs online. On some forums people will have signatures listing children and MCs (chemical pregnancy - October 14, chemical pregnancy - December 15 etc) and go overboard on the whole rainbow thing. It’s quite odd and I think insulting to people who are genuinely struggling with fertility issues or who have experienced harrowing losses.

I'm really sorry that you've had the experience of people doing that DBoo - that's horrendous and incredibly insensitive. As I said, I've never seen it but obviously I'm not denying it happens to you, and I'm sorry it does. I do think it's reflective of those people's own insensitivity rather than a widespread societal belief that all pregnancy losses are equal that has to be corrected, though - after all, as has been said, some people compare the deaths of pets and parents but society definitely doesn't rank those equally. It's illustrative of those people's own self-absorption, not a sign that society cares too much about early miscarriage (which I think is quite hard to argue).

@LisaSimpsonsbff yes sadly it's true.

I think the more openly people talk about miscarraige and loss the more understanding there will be but i appreciate it is easier said than done and on the other hand there is definitely people that can look at loss objectively and deal with it really well. It's good to know dealing with it however you do is ok.

Without wishing to disparage anyone who likes the term "rainbow baby" (whatever gives you joy after heartache is fine by me) I do personally find it mawkish. Also think it's a really tacky now retailers have started to cash in on its popularity and sell "rainbow baby" clothing, etc.

Yes and when you have to have ivf to have a baby if there is any sort of pregnancy loss you can feel like you have lost the only chance you will have of a child.

My MMC was 'only' at 10w but that's as pregnant as I'm ever going to get (from my 2nd IVF cycle. My 4th cycle ended in a chemical pregnancy at 5w - I saw those embryos on screen, the first time I saw and heard the hb multiple times. It's not in any way the same as a stillbirth or late miscarriage, but I still grieve those because they were the only chance I ever had of having a baby.

"t's illustrative of those people's own self-absorption, not a sign that society cares too much about early miscarriage"

Yes, you're right. I thought of another way of putting it, which is maybe helpful.

I think victimhood is now being weaponised as a kind of claim, and (at its worst, by the worst people), it's used as a self-absorbed way of staking a claim in such a way as it doesn't listen to other people and their experience. It is tantamount to a kind of non-recognition to someone who is grieving the sudden loss of a partner to bring up the death of a cat ten years previously, for instance. It's really a social form of self-regarding narcissism that doesn't open a space of compassion for another person. At worst, it can be a way of excluding someone in greater need by insisting that one's own personal pain is the only valid one.

This is very, very different from someone feeling sad about a loss, or wanting to talk about it in a sharing and social way, which is what you are raising. It's really about context, and about appropriacy in a given set of circumstances. It's about the difference between toxic conversation and good discussion too.

I suppose the thing I take issue with is the statement "No-one really does this, do they?" I'm afraid there are some awful people in the world. And they do. And I think it's becoming more common, not less, with this transformation of victimhood into a source of power to shout others down.

I dont know the exact definition of a chemical but it seems to be people who test early and get a faint positive then get their af the day their period is due or around about.

As far as i know the pregnancy never gets off the ground. You dont have to go through anything different to a normal period and had you not tested earlier you would be none the wiser.

A chemical pregnancy is one that does not progress before it can be confirmed on ultrasound ie before 5-6 weeks

Mine was a chemical because my hCG was low and wasn't doubling appropriately. We stopped meds at 5 weeks because it was clear from the hCG that it wasn't going anywhere. My pregnancy tests still said positive at that point, including digis. If we'd not have done bloods I'd have been none the wiser until we got to the viability scan at 6.5 weeks and it would have been classed presumably as an anembryonic pregnancy. As it was because it never got off the ground, my consultant referred to it as a biochemical pregnancy. Although when I had a hysteroscopy 2 weeks later there was still pregnancy tissue ('products of conception') identified on the histology report.

I have had three miscarriages latest at 15 weeks. That is in no way comparible to a late miscarriage or stillbirth. I have never considered my children as rainbow babies even though I guess they are but for me the two things are entirely unrelated.

Oh yes, I am been told that I failed to react with sufficient ‘resilience and stoicism’ to the death of DD1. Her death was classified as a neonatal death as she was less than 28 days old - as we seem to need to define everything so we can allocate very precisely how much grief we are all allowed.

And yes, a work colleague did compare the death of my daughter to the death of her hamster. But perhaps that is the only grief she has ever had in her life? Lucky her. I don’t know that I have met many people who are trying to weaponise victimhood. I think most people are trying (however clumsily) to be kind. Or they want to talk about their own grief because they have a need to and will try and force it in, no matter if it is rather inappropriate.

What is the point in quantifying grief? It’s all just sad and a bit shit. Even if you could run all the circumstances through an algorithm and put a number on it, would anybody really want to emerge the triumphant winner? Of the worst, most terrible pain and grief? I don’t want that particular trophy myself.

Yes, I think there are plenty who do. In the same way that people will reply to someone who is grieving a partner or parent's loss with a tale about how bad they felt when their cat died.

Maybe I’m unusual in this, but I don’t regard this as being:

It's really a social form of self-regarding narcissism that doesn't open a space of compassion for another person. At worst, it can be a way of excluding someone in greater need by insisting that one's own personal pain is the only valid one.

At all. People are weird about death, they don’t know what to say or how to say it. I’m alright around it for various reasons so I wouldn’t be someone to bring up a loss of my own when someone is discussing theirs (unless it was a long term solid friendship and over time it was clear the other person would be receptive to sharing experiences). But I’ve had it happen to me and felt like it was a clumsy but well meaning attempt at empathy.

I’ve lost my own mum, and I’ve lost a cat. Both were agonising, excruciating, the only real difference in the long run was the length of time it took to move past and back into a normal life. But both of those individuals are still sorely missed and in my dreams regularly. When I had the ‘oh gosh I lost my dog three years ago and I didn’t even know how to function at first’ to my mentioning of my mum’s passing, I took it as an attempt from that person to try and empathise in whatever way they knew how. Two people who’ve both experienced love and loss. It certainly didn’t feel minimising to me, though I can believe there are people who do it purposefully in that way. I just wanted to add that not everyone doing that is doing it for the reasons discussed on this thread.

How each individual takes it is down to them of course.

It shouldn't be a competition to see who has had the worst experiences. I had a mc after TTC for a year. The rollercoaster of emotions was awful and DH took it very badly. He couldn't stop sobbing.

I completely realise that this is not the worst thing that would happen, and people go through worse, but that's the wrong way to look at it. Given the context and how we felt about it, these were very valid feelings and I don't feel bad about feeling bad!

I actually found people were nicer/more sympathetic about my first really bad bout of anxiety and depression, which was the 'no obvious cause' type, than after I relapsed after having three (trivially early) miscarriages in five months. They were much keener to argue me out of it then, which unsurprisingly wasn't a huge success. It was clear that it was considered much more of a personal weakness on my part.

Kinda a cross post AWhistlingWoman, saying almost the exact same thing.

I agree re the need to quantify grief. Grief and loss can arise from so, so many different things as a human being. The breakdown of a long relationship from infidelity is a loss. Losing a loved one to death is a loss. Becoming severely disabled and losing your independence is a loss.

It’s such a universal human emotion. While I completely recognise that people ought to try and be more sensitive to what the grieving person needs in the moment, people do get it wrong at times and it’s rarely malicious. I’d hate to reverse back to a time where everybody shunned the grieving because they just didn’t want to risk saying the wrong thing.

Be happy with what you have. And enjoy your wonderful life together. free yourself from societies need for siblings, questions and unsolicited judgements

Personally I don't like the term and never use it either. But I do get a bit stumped every time I'm asked by a doctor/midwife (as I see a different one every time).."is this your first?". I'm like "well 2nd pregnancy, first successful one"... it's weird

Yes, bit of a cross post walking, it is nice to know that we are thinking along similar lines! I am so sorry for the loss of your mum and of your dear cat

You make a very valid point about the grief that arises from situations other than those involving death. It is something that happens to all of us eventually, in one form or another, illness, death, the end of relationships, thing just generally . . . well . . . not quite working out the way that we had hoped they would?

Like you, I wouldn’t want to go back to the times when everyone would simply avoid the topic! Seems crazy when it is something so universal. And if a term like ‘rainbow baby’ helps some people to talk about the losses they have been through? Perhaps that is a good thing?

I think that others on this thread have raised some interesting issues around how survIving children might potentially feel about being referred to, or thought of, in this way. Certainly a contributory factor in my decision to not use the term myself.

Lisa I have also felt that my grief was judged as a personal weakness. It’s horrible and compounds an already difficult and painful situation. I’m so sorry.

Today's blog post is actually well worth reading - a woman describing her experience of pg after multiple losses.
fivelittledoves.com/baby-loss/dear-mama-to-be-surviving-pregnancy-after-loss/
Pregnancy loss has a massive impact on how you feel during any subsequent pregnancies. I found it necessary to tell HCP about my experiences as I needed to be treated differently than if it had been just a straightforward second child.

I've had 6 miscarriages and (what could be considered) 3 rainbow babies. All my living children followed at least one loss.

It would get confusing to refer to them all as rainbow babies?

I find the term cutesy, fluffy and I came across it a lot on the pregnancy site I used during my pregnancies / losses. It's just one of "those" terms to me? I don't like it or use it but I certainly appreciate other people do and I understand why.

Without my losses, I wouldn't have my children and that's how I try to look at things.

My son was born a year after his brother was stillborn and I heard this phrase a lot. I’ve never thought of him as anything other than my second son. To somehow attach him to his brother is unfair to both to them. I personally dislike the phrase but also understand that it brings comfort to some people and would never say anything in RL.