to think losing a baby at 22 weeks is potentially as hard as losing a baby at full term?

[onemissing]

Not much more to add really....having been through the former, I'm often confronted with comments alluding to an earlier loss being "easier" than a later or full term one.

Wondering what you lot think, really.

There was a simelar contraversy on another babyloss group once. Someone commented that full term losses were much worse etc etc and why were people with earlier losses there anyway. I don't come accross that attitude that often though. I don't mind chatting to people about it who had earlier losses because, even though they never had the agony of a later loss and delivery etc etc, they still have had a devastating loss and can understand the feelings somewhat, much more than someone who hasn't lost at all, and many of themare in extreme pain too as i was after an early m/c.

I lost twins at 22 weeks, I knew they were identical and I knew they were boys. My friend had twins and they lived for a few hours and died. She said what we lost was our dream, because we didn't get to know our babies, but they were ours. So I agree, I think the loss is great at whatever stage.

I lost my first at 6 months old, normal pregnancy and birth, and my second at 8 weeks gest. The first one was the hardest for me, as we had a normal family life, a beautiful girl and life was perfect. But I always remember my 2nd as well, and as far as I am concerned I have lost 2 babies. I do not think it matters how far gone you are, a baby is a baby. Noone should play down a mothers emotions on the loss of a child, wherever it is in the pregnancy.
6 months after I buried my daughter, I was asked if I was over it now, and told to be gentle around my mum as she had lost a grandchild, yes and that grandchild was my own daughter!!
I think a baby is a baby no matter what stage you are in, and grief is grief, its loss of a child pure and simple.

Agree with Lunaticfringe some people don't know what to say so they sprout some rubbish.

I have only had one mc and that was bad enough, cannto imagine having one later on when you have a bump and can feel the baby kick, I think 22 weeks is exactly the same as full term IMVHO.

I also had all the comments of
"maybe their was something wrong with it"
"for the best"
"maybe you cannot carry boys!"
"oh well at least you already have two"

People just open their mouths sometimes without thinking.

Perhaps not relevant to the discussion but the things people say to you are outrageous. I lost my daughter during labour - she was a week overdue. Along with ' it's natures way'..the worst one possibly came from a letter from the hospital which said 'I'm sorry for the loss of your pregnancy...' - I hadn't lost my pregnancy I had lost my daughter.

So at all your stories, and at some...

I had 4 early MCs, all before 10 weeks, and I do feel that my losses were less traumatic than my friend's loss of a little boy at 20 weeks, or my greatgrandmother having had 3 stillbirths at or close to term with 3 more children not surviving to the age of 5, or somebody I know losing their DS aged 2 to leukaemia.

At the same time, I agree this is NOT a competition - I like Aitch's comparison, it's a quantum: my grief can be just as severely felt and not be as traumatic as somebody else's at the same time.

I have to admit that I can get a bit with people who've had an early loss and this dominates their every thought for literally years and decades on - but I suspect in those women there might be other unresolved issues at play as well.

OneMissing, my condolences to losing your LO, I hope you are doing ok today.

My Bil laughed down the phone at me after the birth of my Sister's DC as she had a higher AGPAR score than my son. His was 1 and we very nearly lost him....

where to begin really?

What a ridiculous thing to say to someone. The strength of grief & loss isn't a competition FFS.

My Mum's first baby was stillborn at full term, as far as she was concerned you never "get over" losing a child, you just get better at dealing with it over time & it feels less "raw"

The only think I can think people might mean (if they are not being totally insensitive idiots) is that I would imagine (having not experienced it, there but for the grace of God) that generally the physical process of the actual loss (ie the labour) would typically be "easier" (can't think of a better word, so please excuse this word) the earlier the loss. After the physical process of loss is out the way you cannot and should not compare the resulting grief.

I'm not trying to justify what people say, just trying to understand what they may mean, no offence intended to anyone, I know this is a painful topic for anyone who has had a loss

I don't think so. I have a friend who lost a baby at 40 weeks and had to give birth to her full term baby knowing it had died.

She had thought she was out of the woods. she had thought that for weeks and weeks and weeks.

I'm really sorry for your loss OP, but although it depends how strong the person is and how well they deal with it, I think that generally the later in pregnancy the baby dies the harder it is to accept.

Naples - I'm taking it your BIL is a twat in pretty much all situations, then?

thesecondcoming I'm sorry I missed your post earlier. Please don't worry about it, there are lots of things that go wrong but by this point the risks go down all the time.

I don't do the secrecy until 12 weeks because I know that pregnancy can be fragile and if something happened I'd rather just say to people I'd lost the baby and have support than have to explain I was pregnant but now I'm not.

Another thing that annoys me that gets said is there's usually no reason for it. YES THERE IS! Did you know 1/3rd of miscarriage can be explained by 2 conditions? Hughes Syndrome and Turners Syndrome. There are other conditions that make pregnancy difficult - Lupus doesn't come under Hughes Syndrome and that makes it difficult to carry. 1/5th of all pregnancy complications (miscarriage, PreE, IUGR, late loss, stillbirth etc) is caused by Hughes Syndrome. When will the start screening for it as standard in pregnancy and for anyone who hasn't been and loses a baby?

To the OP - I am really sorry for your loss. Try to ignore the comments, they are not helpful, and very insensitive.

As someone who finds early pregnancy very easy (hardly notice I am pregnant) and late pregnancy very hard I can only imagine their comments are based on how they would have felt - and they didn't mean it maliciously - they should not have said anything - because you obviously feel differently.

People view things in different ways - my SIL was distrought for months after suffering a MC at 6 weeks - others get over this very quickly indeed.

I've lost 2 babies the first at 20 weeks and the second at 16 weeks.

The m/c at 20 weeks was certainly a lot harder probably because it was such a shock and as it was my first pregnancy I thought it may happen time and time again.
My second mc happened after having 2 healthy girls, I was very ill (with mealses though not diagnosed until afterwards) so felt the day before my mc that things were going to go wrong. It was a physically very painful exerince as I had a cervical suture in place and there was no time to remove it so I could feel my cervix ripping with each contraction but emotionally I coped much better. I think even if it had been another 20 weeks mc I would have coped the same way.

The pains of my mc feel different to me due to the situatons I was in but I would never want someone to say that one pain should have been less than another due to the differences in gestation - some people can't understand your fears for the future your lost dreams and hopes for the child you didn't have a chance to live with.

Any loss must be terribly painful, and its impossible to say at which week of gestation is worse than any other, a loss is a loss.

Having said that, with the development of early preganancy tests, there are a lot of women who claim miscarriage when all they have experienced is a late period (although I know technically it is a very early miscarriage)

I work with a girl who's period was 3 days later after a BFP. Very dissapointing i'm sure. But hearing her tell the woman who just returned to work after losing her baby at 28 weeks that she knew what she was going through made me feel very uncomfortable.

josie - he sure is.

Maybe we should start a new thread called the worst things people can say when you miscarry.

I remember the "perhaps it's for the best" line. It really got on my nerves. I really don't understand why people think they are being helpful when they say that. All I thought was - if one more person says that to me I am actually going to kill them.

Onemissing, I think the hardest thing nowadays is that everyone thinks they are qualified to give you their opinions - even when you don't really want them and all you want to do is just deal with it in your own way.

Ignore them all, do what you have to do to deal with your loss and I hope you start to feel a bit better soon.

BetsyBoop

Why do you think labour is harder the later on in pregnancy you are? I had to go through induced labour when I lost my baby at 22 weeks and, having already been through labour twice to (thankfully) healthy babies, I can assure you the contractions I felt were 'normal' contractions. The only difference was the crowning. It still hurt like hell but obviously I didn't need to be 10cms dilated to deliver.

I agree with those that are saying it depends on the type of person you are. I still gave birth to my baby, I still buried my baby and I still had all those hopes and dreams shattered at the end of the day.

it's very sad for you but not everybody is destroyed by miscarrage.
I have had 2 before having a child, one at 12 weeks which was physically painful but emotionally not really a problem, and one at 20 weeks which was worse but I did get over it and would never compare it to a still birth or losing a child, which to me is unimaginably sad.

I am emotionally resiliant, true, but quite simply wanted to move on in life rather than be destroyed by an - as yet - unborn baby. Perhaps it is because I have never been broody, ever, I don't know.
Am sorry if that is unplatable to some but these were my true feelings and therefore valid.

I guess there are some aspects of a later loss that are more likely to be worse: like a harder delivery; more gifts/baby purchases to return; more physical difficulties due to a longer pregnancy and the like, but really the main part of grief is the loss of a child not those peripheral things. That grief is more to do with how emotionally attached to a child (or even the idea of a child) you have become, which will be different for everyone and probably can't and shouldn't be compared.

Confuddled, is that statistic that a third of mc caused by hughes or turners syndrome for women who've had more than one mc?

I don't see how I would be more upset if I would have gone a few weeks more. I would have lost the same daughter after all. Losses are so different too, some losses the baby may have been lost weeks before or involve d&c. My baby was alive when I went into labour at almost 21 weeks. I agree with the poster who said labour was painful like any labour. The anticipation of giving birth to your 'sleeping' baby or a baby who may gasp for breath but not be helped is horrific. Yes my baby was unborn but much loved and wanted and I see my loss as as significant as a stillbirth a few weeks later. I did find it especially hard to come to terms with loosing a totally healthy baby compared with a 'reason'.

I thought women with Turners were often infertile? (not totally sure).

There's no point comparing, full stop.
For yourself, maybe: some people draw comfort from comparing their own situation to those of others'.

Earplugs, even in the situation you describe of chemical pregnancy, it's not always straightforward.

My dh has a cousin who had bfp after bfp never progressing in her pregnancy beyond 6 weeks and frequently not even that far. She was ttc for six years and each chemical pregnancy just felt like another nail in the coffin of her dreams for a family.

Or the parents who have their third chemical pregnancy on their third round of IVF? I don't think it's necessarily worse to have a late m/c.. but it is very different.

Which is why it is fruitless to compare.