To be disappointed in hearing that many UK woman drink during pregnancy [shock]

[Leati]

Yesterday, I was on a thread when some of the women started questioning about US policy on drinking alcohol during pregnancies. One of the women had heard that if you have a glass of wine, you could be arrested. I assured her that wasn't true but there was chance that if you were visibly pregnant that the restaurant or bar might exercise their right to refuse service. And if a pediatrician became suspicious of drug or alcohol abuse, they could have the baby?s blood tested at birth. If the baby is found to have these in their blood, the child will be taken away. Another woman pitched that she found it disturbing that restaurants had signs warning pregnant women.

I couldn't believe what I was hearing. These women seemed to believe it was actually okay to drink during their pregnancies. Hadn't they heard of Fetal Alcohol Syndrome. So today, I did a little research and was shocked to learn that it is a big problem in the UK and that there is little education about it there.

Women who are angry over mothers choosing the bottle over nursing are damaging their children by drinking alcohol. This is not minor damage, in some case it is equivalent to severe mental retardation and in others it less obvious cognitive problems. Overall nearly 10% of babies born in the UK are suffering from some sort of cognitive problems directly related to alcohol exposure in the womb.

What broke my heart the most is that I have been on this site and I know that the mothers on this site care so much for their children. That while I may not always agree with everything said and our perspectives are not always the same, that we share a common love for our children. So I felt compelled to start this thread and share the information. I hope that you will share it, with your loved ones and it may spread.

I have attached some sites so you can research this yourself. These sites are both from the UK and the US.

www.fasaware.co.uk/

www.bbc.co.uk/insideout/west/series2/fetal_alcohol_syndro mfaspregnancydrinkinglearning_difficulties.shtml

www.healthychildrenproject.org/glossa ry/

Gizmo - good point. I didn't know we were (until recently) in a minority.
I suppose in the absence of proof either way I have no problem with the recommendation being the only way to be risk-free is total abstinence.

But it's a recommendation and we are still free to make up our own minds, as it should be with most things. I suppose what I mean is that say avoiding smoking in pregnancy should be recommended as it has been proved to have adverse effects, those findings should be well publicised (as they are I think)

God, I ghoty bored with this thread after aboyut the 5th post.

Yawn

UIt's ok though, because the DSs are on their second bottle of cider for the day. It's got a pples in it-one of their 5 a day dont you know

It's organic cider too, so that makes it ok.

blimey I read that. In the US they recommend that even women who "may become" pregnant should abstain That could feasibly cover almost every woman between 12 and 50 who isn't infertile. though at a push I suppose you might consider the more reliable forms of contraception too.

Nah, push on IG, parts of it are worth the effort. I particularly commend Leati's first effort at a press release, which has something of a 'wot I did in my skool hols' ring about it.

Sweetydarling
I read a lot of papers to do with my sons condition and yes in a medical context ( papers aimed at a medical audience), you do see mental retardation used although it is far more common in USA that UK.
It is though a term that makes me sad. It is too close to an insult. It is often simplist and it is often misapplied. It does have far less useage here that in the US and i think many other mums of SN kids probably dislike it here too.
I didn't object to Leati useing it because I understood that she is American whetre it does not have the same overtones it does in the UK, and also because she was trying to write in a medical/academic context.

I would not look to be offended. But if anyone asks that term is certainly not my fav.
Hope thats OK

But you have to look at the reasons why each of those countries have chosen to recommend a no alcohol at all policy.

Overwhelmingly, it is not to do with medical research, it is to do with the ease of public information campaigns.

It is simply an easier message to convey "drink nothing" than "drink moderately". Particularly in cultures where "moderately" is defined according to the education level and normal drinking habits of the individual.

Much easier to say "drink nothing". That's all.

D'you remember that time at Christmas when the govt tried a new message of "keep it low" as opposed to "don't drink and drive"? It utterly failed, mainly because many drivers' idea of low and the actual scientific definition of low was so widely different. Much much more effective to keep the message to lowest common denominator, so that even the very stupid can understand it.

I am intrigued by the concept of giving advice on what is "risk free". Surely life is not a risk free experience?

Life is all about assessing risks and chosing which we wish to take and which we think are unacceptable. It seems to me that most people on here are simply defending their right as competent adults to make those judgements for themselves?

Frankly pregnancy itself is not a risk free experience. We all have (according to my sister - possibly not the most reliable source I realise) about a 1:3500 chance of dying in childbirth, and of course the baby has a far higher chance of not surviving pregnancy. I'm quite happily taking those risks! Perhaps in order to be risk free we should just not have children at all...

or just live in a wardrobe.
I have a friend who went to work on a motorbyke every day for the first 6 months of her pg. I tohough she def had a different way of risk assessing than me. But I drank the odd glass of wine.

Oh god, I saw that, but couldn't read it because tyere were no paragraphs and it sent my eyes funny (mybae that was the 3 bottles of gin I consyumed this morning)

I got bored because I hate the way it's implied that grown women can't make decisions for themselves

I suppose Leati would probably say that DS2 has a conghenital hand deformity because I had the odd glass of red wine during my pregancay (I probably had no more than on or 2 a month)

Belive me, when DS2 was born, I blmaed myself for things I did/didn'y do during pregnacy, untyil I was told it was one of those things. (ie, no amount of abstinance from alcolhol could have prevented it)

Parents who have children with any kind of birth "defect" (what a haorrible word) or special need pribably beat themselves up enough without some wnannabe journo with a predilection for cutting and pasting from Wikipedia making it any worse.

Althjough I do agree that the guidelines in this country are misleading and confusing.

Also would like to ooint out that the comment about the WHO recommending breastfeeding for 2 years only in developing countries is wrong. It's called the World Heath Organisation because it issues guidelies for the, erm, world.

Yes, I'm sure there are good public policy reasons for choosing the simple message of total abstinence - this was the argument made when the government changed the guidelines earlier this year.

And it doesn't change my mind that women should be free to do what they damn well like (if legal) when pregnant. But it's still a bit embarassing to find Leati is correct in her assertion that the UK's policy was out of step with many, many other countries. It's always annoying when patronising people have a point

Gizmo

Her general message is right. I donlt deny that. Heavy drinking is not advisable at any time, especailly during pregancy

However

Her tone is patronising

Her sources are questionable

Her own sense of perfection is overwhelming

LOL. Yes she's right, the UK govt is out of step with other govts.

But then we're out of step on all sorts of other things as well, like not having ID cards, not joining Schengen, not joining the Euro. We can argue about whether we're right or wrong about all that, but being out of step per se doesn't make a country wrong.

I think it's wrong that so many governments have reduced their public health messages to the lowest common denominator so as to address the very stupid, trusting that the rest of us have enough information to make our own choices and not really caring if our choices are then criticised because they go against the simplistic health messages of the authorities. But I can see why they do it.

After all it's cheaper than educating the populace properly so that they're capable of receiving more complex health messages, isn't it?!

IW Leati's not concerned with heavy drinking though, her message is about any drinking.

As if there is no difference between 4 glasses of wine over the course of a pregnancy and a bottle of gin a day during the course of a pregnancy.

Her message is that, although we know heavy drinking leads to FAS, moderate drinking can lead to related disorders (if that's the right word) both physical and behavioural.
I still think 1 or 2 units a week, even every week (which i think is more than most of us have when pg) can be described as moderate.

Well she's probably right, it probably can.

As can being very stressed, distressed or angry over the course of a pregnancy. There's quite good evidence isn't there, that the release of cortisol has an impact on babies in the womb?

No doubt they'll start telling women to stop being angry with their dp's for not doing the laundry while they're pregnant, or to stop being stressed at work. (They won't tell the DP's to pick the socks up or the bosses to stop stressing out their pregnant workers, though, will they?)

Like someone else said, nothing is risk free.

I havent read this whole thread but would like to say that i haven't had any drink since april when i found out i was pregnant. Not even a sip.
If i do i'll finish the whole bottle, and i dont want that.
I was told to remember that when you are getting tipsy your baby is nearly passing out.

See Leati we do try to spread the word about the dangers of drinking when pg and Oh Look, Wurz remembers what I told her and it worked for her too.

I didn't drink anything at all during pg or while bf but not here to enter that debate. My earlier on was to eleusis believing that medicalised birth is safer for mother and baby.

Sorry , e, statiscally you are wrong.

The concern I have about the 'no alchohol in pregnancy' debate (and, apologies, but I just couldn't read all of Leati's sources, they sent my eyes funny). Is that they follow this argument:

1. We know heavy drinking is dangerous (we all agree on that).

2. We have not proved at what level it is low enough to stop being dangerous (if there is one).

3. So we say you must not drink anything.

To me, that is simplistic. Yes, it might be the best advice to be as safe as possible, but it's not the most helpful advice for a woman who wants to do her best but realises that she isn't an angel.

We don't require everything else to be 'proved safe' before we 'allow' pregnant women to do it. We find out what's dangerous and advise accordingly. If we depart from that for one element, why not others. Just about any food can make you ill or be bad for the baby in the wrong circumstances but we don't demand that it is shown to be safe. We advise where we know that there are risks.

I fully agree that a lot of women will choose not to drink. I think that that is the ideal. Just like it is ideal that you don't have a stressful job, and you don't have to stand on the blooming packed Northern Line every morning breathing dust. But I don't think that it helps other women to be safe by being so black and white about it.

i can't believe this thread has carried on for nearly 900 posts!

I think Leati is most guilty of being earnest and has it coupled with no real experience of British life and mindset.

i also wanqt to be 900

Along with an uncritical approach to evidence.

RibenaBerry good point. When are pregnant women going to be told not to drive or get in a car because that's dangerous?