Thank you both.
I typed out the story of Tamsin. I sent it to DH. He told me something he was thinking last night, and his repsonse pleased me. That the most trusting, least conspirasist thinks the same as me, was so refreshing. I cannot though tell you what this is, due to the consequences.
I have to say thought that I had a feeling of sheer panic last night. I realised that I may not have questioned the consultant (actually I never saw the consultant, I only ever got to see a SHO/registrar, and now wonder if they would have had the experience to pick up ny potential problems), sufficiently about the fall in AFI.
I remembered that when you have a scan before seeing the consultant (or their junior), that you don't get your notes back until you leave. It is because the experts are supposed to look at the scan, and be warned about any potential problems.
At the last scan the sonographer did ask if I'd noticed any leaking (I hadn't), and then just said that the fluid levels had gone down. She then said that she'd just look at Tamsin's kidneys. I did wonder why she did this, and asked if there was a problem, and she said that they looked fine - now there is no earthly reason why she would look at the kidneys, unless she was worried that there was a problem... it is not normal to look at kidneys at another time - only at the anomaly scan - or if you suspect a problem. Therefore she did believe the AFI to be a problem...but she never informed or alerted anyone to this fact.
I aslo asked if she was going to do a doppler, as she seemed to finish before she should have, and she said that it wasn't requested, but she had a quick cursory check, as I'd asked. Funnily enough I have in front of me now, the scan letter, stating it was for US third trimester growth scan & doppler study!
I did ask the SHO/registrar about the AFI (but I didn't know the numbers, just a feeling of unease gained from the sonographer looking at her kidneys), but she said the growth was fine. She was more concerned with how they were going to deliver Tamsin, as the scan had shown she was tranverse, and that they were going to admit me in a week (less than two days after she died). I also asked about the doppler thing.
I am now wracked with guilt. I thought it was odd, when I saw how much the AFI had fallen on the graph, but I didn't phone up the consultant & shout and scream... I really did fail Tamsin, as I knew it wasn't right, but stupidly believed that if there had been a problem then they'd had seen it - what the hell is the point in a scan if they don't act on it? And after the last scan I went mad about the doppler, and was assured by the Dr & midwife, that if there was a problem, they'd have acted on it - they'd have taken me in there & then... I (tragically) believed the same this time.
I've discovered that the falling AFI would have had a disastrous effect on the knot in her cord. The fall in fluid would have compressed it.
Knowing this has made me more distressed. I couldn't have known about the cord, but I did know the fluid had fallen. And I was arrogant, oh so arrogant, in my faith that the Dr would have taken action if it was abnormal... how the hell can i live with that. That seeing the graph, I didn't do something? I should have made a fuss, my daughter's life depended on it, yet I was too scared maybe? I'd ask once, but if assured that things were fine then I'd be too scared of making a fuss.
Should I have done something when I got home? Should I have presented myself at L&D and demanded they investigate the fallen AFI? I guess I hid behind the fact that the scan was performed before the consultant's appointment - surely this was so they could spot problems there and then? Should I never trust a Dr again?
The other puzzling thing is I had a scan at 28 weeks, then another at 36 weeks. This may seem a lot, but with DD1 they gave them to me every 4 weeks. I do believe the extra scan would have made a difference. I truly do. If the levels hadn't diminished slowly, then the last scan would have picked it up... there'd have been more cause for concern, as it would have been more obvious & would have shown as an acute condition.
By waiting another 4 weeks, means they could fool themelves that there was a gradual decrease in liquor - which I truly believe there wasn't - the fact is that in 5 days there was no fluid, I believe that her levels fell, and fell quickly, and that if they'd scanned me a day later, they'd have noticed a further decrease.
It's almost more unbearable if there was a problem, that was failed to be picked up. If it was preventable - I almost wish it was a sudden, unpreventable tragdey, but 'm almost convinced that if the AFI levels were flagged, then she could have been saved - and that is so distressing.
Even worse, I as her mother, did fail her. I didn't shout & kick & scream, I should have, instead i blindly trusted that the professionals knew what they were doing, and my daugther paid with her life... I can never forgive myself for that.