Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

AIBU to suggest that people should not do a pregnancy test until a few days after their period is due?

86 replies

FireBrick · 05/09/2018 14:32

Name changed for this as I'm sure I'll get flamed!

So many times on the conception board you see the following:

OP tests at ~10dpo and gets a very faint line, and posts a picture for others to look at. Posters confirm they can see it too and congratulate the OP.

A day or two later the OP posts again that they'd done another test and it was fainter, or negative. They are confused and upset.

A couple of days after that they get their AF. They are naturally devastated and disappointed.

If instead they had waited to test, they would just have got their period at about the expected time, and would have only had the disappointment of not conceiving that month (which I am not downplaying!)

What is gained by testing early? If the pregnancy is successful you will have found out a few days earlier than you would otherwise (on a 40 week pregnancy!). If not successful, you open yourself up to heartbreak of a miscarriage and dashed hope that you could have avoided by waiting until you miss your period until you test.

I'm not criticising anyone, especially not people struggling with infertility who are desperate to be pregnant. But I think that testing early, or using an early response test, is likely to cause more unhappiness and negates the benefit of testing early.

Do others agree or AIBU?

OP posts:
Treaclepie19 · 06/09/2018 14:39

How about women with short cycles like me?
I tested when my period was due and got a positive. I was only 3w 3d. Should I have waited until after 4 weeks and therefore been pretty sure i was pregnant and upset if it went wrong anyway?
People generally have a suspicion they're pregnant. It's not always going to help just not testing.

onetimeposter · 06/09/2018 14:42

Yanbu. There would be no chemicals if this were the case. Thus no distress.

TheGoddessFrigg · 06/09/2018 14:50

Can I also add- I have passed out from pain with a period.

DeadHerring · 06/09/2018 15:39

@kikisparks nailed it.

Yes, in most cases it's probably wise to wait till after your period's due. However, if you're having problems conceiving, then it's a good idea to test a couple of days early.

A chemical pregnancy, while distressing for the mother, can be invaluable in helping diagnose what issues are present - in actuality, having a chemical pregnancy means that you're not infertile at all, but you may still be subfertile.

But if you've had a chemical pregnancy, then it means an egg was fertilised successfully and was producing enough hcg to result in a positive test. That's actually a huge deal. It means that, at the very least, ovulation occurred successfully, that the sperm is motile enough to reach and fertilise the eggs and that there's no tubal obstructions. All this factors might not be optimal, but it's a definitive indicator that they do at least function.

Also, as one poster above said, people like to manage their expectations and a fading pregnancy test line can be kinder for some people than sudden cramps.

Ultimately, your mileage will vary but, yes, YABU to suggest that people shouldn't do it. There are good, pragmatic reasons for doing it but that's irrelevant, really - it's their choice and they don't need your authoritarianism on what they should or shouldn't do, when it doesn't affect you in the slightest. If you don't like hearing about it, don't read the threads.

Batteriesallgone · 06/09/2018 15:50

If you are passing out because of your periods that’s a separate medical issue. It doesn’t justify dismissing miscarriage as ‘just’ a heavy period.

I feel like this conflation of period and miscarriage is a hangover from the days when women married early and often didn’t want another pregnancy - if a period is a happy relief, I can see why you would resist thinking too hard about it being late, or very heavy, because ah well all’s well that ends well.

That kind of thinking naturally doesn’t translate well into a TTC situation.

Matilda1981 · 06/09/2018 15:53

I’m in total agreement too OP, I won’t add any more to my comment as I’ll get totally flamed!!!

PersianCatLady · 06/09/2018 15:56

Quite often on here people will congratulate the OP when there is no line to be seen.

Sorry, but to me it is a bit sick to say "congratulations on your BFP"

Purpleartichoke · 06/09/2018 16:00

After years of ttc, impatience is common

I was generally pretty good about waiting, but one month I needed some serious dental work so tested early to be safe. Turned out to be a good thing because I was pregnant with my daughter and while the dental work had to proceed, we had to take a lot of precautions and modify some things to make it safer.

CherryPavlova · 06/09/2018 16:03

I agree. I think very early testing has no real benefits and creates huge heartache when women don’t have an enduring pregnancy. It costs the health service a lot with women going to ED or an EPU for a miscarriage when a couple of decades ago it would be shrugged shoulders at a ‘late period’. It used to be easier.

noenergy · 06/09/2018 16:04

I always tested early but used digital tests. At least it clear to know either way.

Getting other to look for faint lines can get your hope up and then cause heartbreak.

So digital all the way

LisaSimpsonsbff · 06/09/2018 16:09

It costs the health service a lot with women going to ED or an EPU for a miscarriage when a couple of decades ago it would be shrugged shoulders at a ‘late period’. It used to be easier.

Yes, but back then a lot more women suffered serious complications from ectopic pregnancies that weren't diagnosed (and ectopic pregnancies can kill, in the worst case scenario). That's what EPU are looking for - they can't help you if it's a miscarriage, but they need to rule out it being ectopic as that can be so dangerous.

LisaSimpsonsbff · 06/09/2018 16:13

I had three miscarriages at five, five and seven weeks - so I guess not quite what this OP is talking about as a little later, but I've been told plenty of times that if only we didn't have modern pregnancy tests I'd have never known I was pregnant and that that would have been much better. I disagree - if I hadn't known I'd have been having infertility investigations not recurrent miscarriage ones, I wouldn't have had treatment and perhaps (I'll never know whether it was the drugs or just luck as my miscarriages were 'unexplained', but it seems to me more than coincidence that it was after the treatment that one stuck) I wouldn't now have a gorgeous sleeping baby on the sling on my chest. I don't think that would be better at all.

RosiesYellowDress · 06/09/2018 16:24

AIBU? Yes because you had to name change to ask the question

BigFatDork · 06/09/2018 16:25

I am so glad that these tests werent available when I was young, it must drive you crazy doing all these early tests! I have never heard of a chemical pregnancy so dont know what that is.

In my day (I am 48) you had to be 2 weeks late before you could do a test and they were very expensive (1988) so I couldnt afford them. I first was pregnant at age 18 but I didnt know until I was 11 weeks and miscarrying, and I was spotting all the time, that was why I went to the dr, I had no idea that I could be pregnant.

Next time I thought that I might be pregnant, I bought a test, it was some complicated kit that had to be mixed up and left for ages until it went blue. Right faff.

Another time I missed a period completely, which was very unusual as I was regular as clockwork. The next month I came on at the usual time but it was very heavy and painful, I wonder if that was also a miscarriage but I never thought to do a test.

I think if I was young now and trying to conceive I wouldnt use all these early tests, too stressful, I would just wait until period was late for 2 weeks and then test to be sure.

Daisychain11 · 06/09/2018 16:31

I was far too excited to wait until after my missed period so tested early each month. I’m lucky it only took a few months to conceive otherwise I would have spent a fortune on tests. I tested 3/4 days before missed period and got a positive using a standard test.

So yes I agree that it probably does stress you out more but I couldn’t help myself, I needed to know ASAP.

hammeringinmyhead · 06/09/2018 16:57

I didn't test until I was almost 7 weeks. I had had an implantation bleed which I thought was a period (I have 6 week cycles). I have to say that my first thought was to be grateful I was only 5 weeks from my scan and not 8 because you start worrying about miscarriage or missed miscarriage almost immediately. Basically you worry from the moment you start TTC and I don't think when you test makes much difference.

BestBeforeYesterday · 06/09/2018 17:08

I agree OP, I don't know what the advantage is of testing so early. It just seems to add confusion and in many cases, heartbreak.

BestBeforeYesterday · 06/09/2018 17:17

How about women with short cycles like me? I tested when my period was due and got a positive. I was only 3w 3d.
In that case, you are not testing early. If your cycle is normally 24 days, that means you will be ovulating on the 10th day or so of your cycle. Testing at 24 days therefore means you are 14dpo.

kikisparks · 06/09/2018 18:17

@BestBeforeYesterday not everyone ovulates 14 days before their period comes/ has a 14 day luteal phase. I have a 25day cycle (average, can be 21-28) and on day 25 I’m usually 10dpo and my period comes.

kikisparks · 06/09/2018 18:19

@DeadHerring thanks, I think a lot of people just don’t understand if they haven’t been long term TTC.

kikisparks · 06/09/2018 18:23

@noenergy the thing is digitals are nowhere near as sensitive as FRER/ Internet cheapies. Which is fine if you’re going for “I only want to know if I’ve already got a high level of hcg” but less so if you want to know whether you can get pregnant at all, even if it ends in early miscarriage.

Also digitals the expensive! If you’re TTC for years that would really add up.

kikisparks · 06/09/2018 18:26

@onetimeposter sadly it’s wishful thinking to think that there would be no distress if you didn’t test early. When you’re subfertile and long time TTC there’s a lot of distress, having a chemical can almost alleviate some distress compared to month after month after month of nothing, as I explained above.

NotTakenUsername · 06/09/2018 18:39

I don’t think this is something to have an opinion on. It’s just to personal to the individual.

onetimeposter · 06/09/2018 19:01

Sorry to hear that kiki. As someone who falls at the drop of a hat, I apologise for not considering that side of the fence. Thanks for explaining.

crispysausagerolls · 06/09/2018 19:10

I agree in principle with what you are saying, however I felt very unwell 2 days before period was due and tested because I was desperately TTC. On one hand it was so wonderful knowing; but on the other I was scared shitless all period week. However if I hadn’t tested I would have suspected anyway so what’s the difference really? When you are TTC the days are just sooooo long around your period time and made longer by the “will it/won’t it appear” thoughts.

Swipe left for the next trending thread