To want a couple of glasses of wine when pregnant??

[tootidy]

I am nearly 10 weeks pregnant and would like to drink a couple of glasses of wine (per week) as I did when i was pregnant with my other children. The current guidelines are not to drink at all which is different to what it used to be.

some folks get so worked up they really could use a drink .

What a load of pious bullshit. Well done you tee-totalling saints. Now get away from that computer - don't you know how much radiation it's giving off? (and I don't think anyone would argue with the research that shows that radiation is BAD for unborn babies).

I'd like to know if all the countries where women drink wine in pregnancy as a norm, have higher rates of FAS than we do.

I bet they don't.

Excellent point re the difference in attitude to breastfeeding (a known and undisputed phenomenal benefit to babies) and light / moderate wine drinking (a still disputed activity where all the statistically valid research points to it making no difference to health of babies).

Just read some posts on this thread. Masflaka, I take it you had your baby/ies in Spain. Well so did I, and my midwife actually advised me that I needed levadura de cerveza (beer yeast) I know she obviously meant the powdered stuff, but when I asked her if it was ok to have the odd beer then, she said "Of course, I would recommend it!"
I completely cut out drinking any spirits whilst I was pregnant, but enjoyed the odd red wine and half a guinness.

Sod guidelines, if you feel well and healthy, chances are, so is your baby.

Only you yourself can make the decision whether or not you feel comfortable drinking whilst pregnant.

KVC: surely the CDC specialises in infectious diseases? Exactly what FAS is, and how it is caused, is still in some dispute (given that raging alcoholics often don't give their babies FAS) but it is not an infectious disease ie a baby won't get it because its mum stood next to someone sipping a sherry while pregnant.
And even if a website is an Official Government one, that actually is no guarantee that it's not full of shit.

to hear your story Raph. You make a good point: there are no guarantees for anyone in this game.

Completely avoiding alcohol is a harmless superstition similar to touching wood, and if it makes people feel safer and more in control of the outcome, that's fine.

But (just like touching wood) there's no evidence that it actually is safer or has any impact on outcome. So there's no point in criticising the people who aren't touching wood.

Oh yes, and the snidey moralising is making my teeth itch.

It's sooooo easy, isn't it, to score cheap moral brownie points by suggesting that someone who wants to drink 1-2 units a week is dependent on alcohol, lacks self control, or just doesn't care very much about their baby. And your basis for thinking this is what? There's no evidence that an abstainer is at a lower risk of anything at all than a moderate drinker.

I have no personal axe to grind here by the way - I'm 29 weeks pregnant and will be surprised if I have a total of 2 units of alcohol in the whole pregnancy, let alone once a week.

But strangely I feel no need to award myself gold mummy stars just because I don't fancy wine much at the moment. In the same way I wouldn't give out black marks to someone who does want a glass of wine a week. There's no moral issue here.

KVC - apart from 'an admission from the mother that she drank during pregnancy'; what else is required for a diagnosis of FASD? Because nothing you've written so far suggests that the difference between this, and other labels for differently-functioning children (including treatment options), is anything other than a couple of letters... plus a great big "IT'S ALL MY FAULT - I JUST DIDN'T CARE ENOUGH" badge for the mother.

I know where the poison is in this debate.

Don't the Chinese pretty well live on MSG? I think they'd have spotted it if it affected the unborn baby.

KVC - the point remains that all that stuff about FASD is irrelevant to those who have no more than a couple of units a couple of times a week. There is still no evidence to suggest that would lead to FASD or any other problems.

Insinuating that it does just adds guilt and stress to expectant mothers.

I think you've been pretty level in your responses, KVC, and I've found your information interesting. It's an emotive subject, for sure!

I had a couple of glasses per week, just to be clear. I might avoid it next time though, as it's frustrating to have one teeny glass. A bit like with the fags, I'll prob find it easier to have none (haven't smoked for years). Then I'll crack open the bubbly whilst bottle-feeding fanta to my child

As far as I know, there is mo evidence that aspartame or MSG are in any way harmful either. But I am more wary of them because they've not been around for thousands of years.

KVC, you haven't actually answered my question.

How, precisely, do the symptoms of FASD differ from other kinds of developmental problems? Because if there is a clear answer, I really don't see why an admission from the mother that she drank during pregnancy is essential - and I certainly don't see how failing to extract such an admission should result in a lack of intervention for symptoms that have been observed and reported (if not, according to some, accurately labelled).

PS - the 'poison' comment wasn't aimed at anyone in particular. It was meant to refer to the kind of society that uses guilt as a method of behaviour management; that encourages a culture of entitlement with a consequent culture of blame; and that has come to rely so heavily on labels that the human story beneath them frequently gets lost.

I don't even understand why we are discussing FAS. It's simply irrelevant in the context of someone asking if they can drink a couple of glasses of wine a week.

Quite. However, KVC opened her argument with this sentence:

"I know mothers who drank no more than a few glasses a week whose children have FASD/FAS"

which is presumably why her subsequent comments are being so thoroughly examined...

KVC. That link doesn't work.

I did find this, though. And again, all it says is that if a mother admits to drinking while pregnant, we can find a neat cause for a whole range of symptoms that actually, we don't fully understand ourselves.

KVC, do you actually mean to imply that women whose children show some symptoms that some or other buckethead thinks might be FASD are going to be labelled as alcoholic liars if they say that they didn't drink alcohol in pregnancy? And that their children are going to suffer forever bcause they are WIcked Selfish Bitches who WOn't Admit how WIcked They Are? Because that is very much how your post sounds. THe reason sensible people get so irritated by the pious anti-drinkers is that it is all part of a wider spectrum of misogyny, of not just telling women that foetuses are more important than anything a woman might want or do or need, far more important than the woman herself, but that women cannot trusted and therefore must be monitored and controlled. There is a horrible tendency to kind of pit women and foetuses against each other (all this rubbish about giving foetuses 'rights') which has got steadily worse, especially in the US as women have gained rights and status and it's been OK to say that you don't actually want children, that there's life beyond housework etc. Demanding that women be percieved and treated first of all as foetus-containers is what is really behind most of the scaremongering: putting women back in their subordinate place.

just found this thread and was going to simply say that when your baby is born you'll spend hours sterlising and protecting them from everything - why is it different when they're inside you?

but then i read solidgold's post and PMSL - since when does anyone NEED alcohol? and how is saying don't drink for the good of your child misogyny? of course there is life beyond housework, but maybe for 9 little months of your life this can go on without alcohol. it's really not that hard, you know

Did you trouble to read the rest of the thread, pinata? Because sgb's post really needs to put in context before you dismiss it as a bit of a laugh; you are somewhat missing the point of it.