A Rhesus Negative Mums!

[Expectantmum]

Wondered if could give me some advice/set my mind at rest. I am 30, 22 weeks pg and have just found out that my blood group in A Rhesus Negative, which means I have to have the Anti D (I think thats what the midwife called it) jabs over the next few months. Can I hear from any other women who experienced the same and just set my mind at rest and maybe put into some terminology I might understand .

Thank you!

this really isn't anything to worry about, I am O rhesus negative and had to have the jabs with my last pregnancy and this one too. Basically I always get the facts wrong about this but it's to do with your baby having a blood group which may not be compatible with yours : therefore you need the anti D injections in case of a bleed. They hurt a bit ( in the upper arm) but have no side effects and are very routine.Sorry my scientific expertise is so crap but the jabs really are fine!

I am the same (Rh Neg) but so is DH so there is no chance of baby being Rh positive. However when I had DS (1st pregnancy) they gave me Anti D as routine. In case DH wasn't the father . Jab in the thigh if I remember correctly - at about 11 or 12 weeks & then a follow up jab after DS was born.

Medical blurb below (lots of info if you search the web):
If you have the rhesus factor (which is a protein on the surface of your red blood cells) you are Rh-positive, if you don?t you are Rh-negative. Most people (about 85%) are Rh-positive.
The rhesus state only matters in pregnancy if the mother is Rh-negative, the father is Rh-positive and the baby is also Rh-positive.
So what can go wrong?
There are, in fact, various rhesus genes. Among them are c, d and e, which can be either positive (C, D, E) or negative (c, d, e). It is the ?d? genes that particularly concern us.

Rh(D) positive cells contain a substance (D antigen) which can stimulate Rh(d) negative blood to produce harmful antibodies that destroy red cells. The harmful antibody is called ?anti-D? and can be produced if a mother is Rh-negative but her baby is Rh-positive.

Rhesus incompatibility doesn?t occur with first pregnancies because the antibodies aren?t present in the mother?s blood. However, in subsequent pregnancies, if the babies are rhesus positive, there may be a problem. The mother?s antibodies will cross over the placenta into the baby?s blood and, regarding it as ?foreign?, will try to break it down.

This causes problems with the baby?s haemoglobin level (the iron-carrying element in the red blood cells) which then falls, causing anaemia. Blood transfusion are then necessary at birth and babies could also be severely jaundiced.

Thank you Donnie and Whizz. Dh does not know his blood type, so presumably then I'd just have the jabs for now as a precautionary measure. Didn't bother reading up about the Rhesus Negative groupings in my book in the early days as I had no idea what blood group I was, but just assumed I'd be "normal" - if you get my drift. I was abit concerned that my midwife would not have mentioned it had I not asked out of interest what blood group I was, but she has called me back in three weeks time so discuss whether I want the jabs or not, but providing theres no risk then I'll definitely have them.

Thanks ladies - have a good weekend, I just hope it stops snowing soon, I have a wedding to go to on Sunday!

Hi,

I am A Rhs neg. dd father was something pos.

There's really nothing to worry about. They will give you a card to carry round in case you have an accident it's really tasteful - brightly coloured with "I'm pregnant and rehsus negative" written on it

You will have a few extra blood tests but there's really nothing to worry about. If you bleed you need to have an 'anti d' injection (think that's what it's called)

And after the birth they will check babies blood type (if it's positive they will give you an injection to stop you producing antibodies (in case you have another baby that is neg). Basically if you develop these antibodies your body can reject a feteus that is negative. If that makes sense.

Sorry probably mears and co can explain better.

Oh sorry seems to have been some posts since I started writing that!

Mental note to self must not get distracted from mn by work

Hi, I Agree it seems to be where you live that affects whether you're given Anti D as routine during the pregnancy,
I have 3 children, dh is o+ and I'm o-,
dd was o+, so I had anti D following her birth
ds was o+ , again Anti D following birth
ds was A- so I didn't need Anti D
Reading all the literature can be worrying, but as long as you know and carry the card saying your +, you really don't need to worry unless you have an internal bleed, in which case you will treated appropriately.

I am Irish and we had a big anti-D scandal here years ago where a 1000 women or so were infected with HEP C because they were Rh-neg and received contaminated Anti-D. However, the anti-D is very screened now but my point is that I was on high alert from minute one with regard to being very fully informed on everything. The internet has been my main source of info as the printed matter on this is very sanitised indeed. My main concern at first was that this anti-D was preserved with Thimerosal which is mercury and I was alarmed at the prospect of receiving this while pregnant. Started searching google. hmmm. lots of warnings. Anyway they have u-turned on the mercury and taken it out although I haven't received total confirmation of this (apointment next week for questions) but it was banned in 2003 in the USA but they still say 'oh we banned it but it was safe' - you have to read between the lines with these ppl, medical corporations do not always have our immediate interests at heart! Anyway apart from the mercury issue, without it anti-d still remains a blood product and it's workings remain unclear even to the experts. I am waiting till the baby is born (unless I bleed etc) and if it's negative I won't have had any unneccesary anti-d. If it's positive I will get the jab then (also if they dont hurry the placenta out the bleed is less and the dosage needed may be lower - but does this suit a busy hospital, it will have to!) The risk of HDN to the next baby is 1.12% if I get the jab post partum and 0.8% if I get the two shots during pregnancy as well. Not a serious risk improvement, it's very low as it is. I just don't trust the Routine shots, they can't say there's any risks until continued, recordable, heavy evidence of adverse affects to the children are recorded. With medicine this can be 20 years or a lifetime before they do. I am using my intuition on this one and I would rather gamble with a fraction of a 1% chance of jaundice or even HDN than a sea of unknown with antenatal injections of blood product. (phew!)

I am A-Rhesus neg, and knew nothing about this! Mirashark, how long ago was mercury taken out of the anti-D jab? Round here you only get it after the birth with your first baby, bu8t I wasn't given a choice, they said they wouldn't discharge me until I had had the jab, so I had it (Iknow, naive, but i was only 22)

Can't find actual facts about the Thimerosal(mercury) situation in the UK but it was used originally because they'd use what they call multi-dose vials. The same container of anti-d may be used a few times so if a needle is going in they need it to be totally sterile and this was the job of the mercury. If they use single-dose vials there's no need for the mercury but it's obviously more expensive. Anyway I did a fair bit of snooping around and see they use a anti-D called D-Gam here and you can find the contents online, looks ok, don't see any mercury in there. I will ask all about it at my appointment next week, dunno what the law has been here. But it is definitely important to get an anti-D shot after the birth of a Rh+ baby for the safe-guard of your next kids, don't get me wrong. I just don't want to be subject to the new fashion of having two shots at 28 and 34 weeks pregnant as well, before even knowing the bloodtype of the baby. Having said that I am slightly increasing my risk of future HDN but I am making that informed choice, that's my decision. I think the hospitals generally have to just make the decision for people because they know more about it and can't really let people take a known risk as opposed to avoid a 'maybe' risk (maybe the anti-d has unknown side effects etc etc)

Is it usual to have jabs during the pregnancy? I am O- and DP is +. They have known blood type since first blood tests but I haven't had any jabs. I presumed I would just get one after the birth unless I had any bumps to the bump in the meantime. Is this right or should i be cahsing them for tests and jabs?? (Now 28 weeks!)

Might be best to chase them Holly. I'm 23 weeks and I am only going by what my midwife told me, but she said I have to have a jab at 28 and one at 34 (I think, might have been 32) but that could be because we don't know what my DP's blood group is. She said that after the birth, they would test baby and depending on the result, both me and baby might need another jab then. Mind you, every county and borough seems to have different treatments for everything and I'm in Kent, so you maybe different, can't hurt asking though!

I always worry about this whole rhesus neg thing and what it means exactly. I am 0neg and as dd was positive I had the anti-D shot after her birth. I am currently 34 weeks pg with No2 and noone has really batted an eyelid at me being rhesus neg - they checked for antibodies at the first lot of bloodtests and then again at the 28 week lot - came back negative so looks like nothing to worry about. Certainly don't have any kind of card to carry about or anything...

Just to confuse thins more - I am O- and so is DH.

First pregnancy ended in early m/c - gave me anti d as a precaution. (didn't do a blood test to see if required)

2nd pregnancy - gave birth to ds - tested blood and did not require anti d.

3rd pregnancy - another early m/c - tested blood and DID require anti d.

4th pregnancy - gave birth to dd and they gave me
anti d witout a test.

Confusing or what???

Yes if you are both negative - then baby will be negative too. BUT hospitals tend not to believe you - just in case & jab you anyway !! I posted an Anti D tip about asking for the jab in your bum rather than your arm (as in your arm it hurts like mad for ages after!!)

hmmm I am A neg and had the jab only after DTs were born - should I have had it during preg too?

probably not, Harrowgate mum, as you were probably tested for antibodies and found not to need it.

I'm O- and am 38 weeks pg with number 2 and so far have not needed anti-d at all - I get tested at 28 and 34 weeks, and dd turned out to be rh neg herself so didn't need it after her birth. If this baby is rhesus pos, I'll have it if not I won't.

My MW told me that hospitals sometimes still give the Anti-D in cases where the husband is also Rh Neg just in case the father is someone else. It can particularly be a problem in those cases where the partner either attends ante-natal appointments or may have access to the hand-held notes as women don't want to admit to the possibility of a different father in case they are found out.

Both of my sons are Rh Pos like dh. In both pregnancies I was only given the Anti-D after the birth. My blood was tested for antibodies early in the pregnancy. There were no antibodies found so it was decided that no anti-D was needed during the actual pregnancies.

In our area the midwives give the anti-d routinely to rhesus negative women assuming the father might not be who he's said to be.

I'm rhesus negative and dp is rhesus positive. which resulted in loads of extra jabs in pregnancy 2 and 3 (not in pregnancy 1).

If dp hadn't been rhesus positive I would have refused the jabs - why have unnecessary interventions if you are sure who the father is and he's not got the wrong blood group? for those reasons mirashark says, I think it's worth refusing the intervention if you know personally your dp's blood group and it's not the wrong one?

Just to add another dimension to this - in our local paper last week was the story of a woman who had Anti D but it failed & her baby (#2) had to have 3 transfusions in the womb & another one when he was born. I'm not trying to worry anyone but it happens.... (both are OK by the way) I can prob find the article if anyone is interested.

At my booking in appointment I was told that as a result of NICE guidelines all women who are rh pos should be offered anti-d at 28 and 34 weeks. I asked about the pros and cons. DH is A pos, I am A neg and dd is A pos. So I had anti-d after her birth. I couldn't see why I should have prophylactic anti-d when the approach last time seemed to work fine. Midwife said it is only a guideline and she personally would avoid unnecessary blood products. I think I will opt out too, although should I have a bump injury or bleeding they'd obv. give me the ant-d as a precaution then. But you can't help wondering...
According to the m/w, about 15 years ago people were routinely given anti-d, until concerns over the quality of the blood supply (HIV and CJD) led to a shortage of blood products, so the precautionary approach was abandoned. It is very confusing.

i had about 3+ bleeds while pregnant with ds (5 yrs ago)and had about 3 jabs of anti d while pregnant- they did a test on the ward, waited for the results, and gave it me then. This was at 17 weeks (very bad bleed), plus more further on.