Possibly sensitive - I want to ask what you think about when the terms miscarriage and stillbirth are applied.

[NothereisnobodylurkingbehindU]

I've been thinking about this for a while and I just want to get a sense of what others think. I have two friends who have lost children in uterine deaths. One was in late pregnancy and the other at 20 weeks. Both those children have a place in those families, they have names and graves and many tears have been shed over both. But one is termed a miscarriage and the other in stillbirth and tbh I don't see how that is a useful distinction to make. Both families have suffered a terrible loss and we, their friends, should remember both. I notice from a bit of a google that the term 'stillbirth' is very rarely used in the USA - they use fetal death instead. That seems to me to be a much better term though I can't quite think why. That term could be used for loss at all gestations and you'd avoid the implication that is there in our culture I think - that a miscarriage is less serious than a stillbirth and a stillbirth is less serious than the death of a child. There is an implied hierachy that is in fact a nonsense - and you can see it's a nonsense when you see people suffering such loss. Anyway I'd be glad to know what other people think - and if there is strong feeling that I will message MNHQ and see if they can pass it along.
I hope that nobody minds me asking this - it's been on my mind a lot. If people do mind though please post and say so and I'll ask for this to be removed.

An interesting point OP.

However I do feel there is something very different in losing a baby at 7 weeks (as I have done twice) and losing a baby at 37 weeks (as my poor sister did).

I know that however upset I was, it would definitely been worse had I carried my child for another thirty weeks then lost it.

I do not beleive my loss at 7 weeks would have been as bad as losing at baby at 37 weeks. At 7 weeks I had a very heavy clotty period, at 37 weeks my sister had the trauma of giving birth to a beautiful little boy she knew was already dead.

And I may be wrong, but I think most women would feel the same way. I think it is accepted as a general truth that the further along the pregnancy you are, the worse it is when the baby is lost.

However OP, I accept your point, maybe foetal death is a more suitable term for some

I agree with tired lady. I had 4 early miscarriages and would not compare them to the loss of a baby at late pregnancy. I thought the medical cut off is 24 weeks, before this is a miscarriage and after a stillbirth.

agree with tiredlady - it isn't the same thing, though there is a grey area around 20 weeks -

I had an early miscarriage. I know there is no comparison, however painful that was, to a death much later in pregnancy and i count myself lucky that i have 'only' experienced a miscarrige.

I think the grey area is probably for deaths between 13 and 24 weeks. I think everyone acceots that miscarriage in the first trimester is common and so in some ways acepted as a risk of wanting to start a family. But i imagine losing a baby after you get through that into the 'safe' period is traumatic almost regardless of when it happens because it is so much less expected. it's called somethin different at 23 and 25 weeks, but i doubt it feels much different to the parents involved.

Thanks to all and I'm sorry to hear of your losses. Personally I was thinking that yes the grey area is after 12 weeks but before 24 - but then having never suffered either loss myself, it seemed like a bit of an imposition to assume that. So I didn't.
I just don't like that there is that grey area. It seems like there doesn't need to be - what purpose does it serve? Except for determining who is eligible for maternity pay and leave - and that's a whole different issue I think.

I always feel that the word miscarriage doesn't do the loss of my DS enough justice - he died at 21+6 (although was born breathing) another couple of weeks and he'd have been classed as stillborn. I certainly wasn't entitled to any maternity leave and my DS wasn't entitled to a birth or death certificate despite me giving him a funeral and therefore paying for a headstone and plot. I tend to tell people I had a late loss as I know technically it wasn't a stillbirth.

If you start changing terms and when these terms are applied you end up with people saying, "But why is my 19 week loss any different to your 20 week one?" and they want a term that covers them to show how different their loss is to an early m/c.

What would be good is that if people were able to register their miscarried babies. I know many wouldn't want to do that so it could be something you could do if you wanted to. I have a Stillbirth certificate for my DS2 and would have liked something for my DS4 that I m/c at 14 weeks.
I think something like that would be more helpful than a simple change of words.

I suppose you just deal with what's in front of you. Like you I can't imagine dealing with the loss of any of my children - but neither can I imagine dealing with the loss my friends have suffered - and that you suffered. I'm so sorry about dd2 - how heartbreaking .
The number of people in this day and age who have to deal with both is thankfully quite small - I assume and hope!

I tell you what's set me down this path I think - it's that figure that SANDS use in their campaign - 17 babies a day who are stillborn. That's not a rare event and yet nobody talks about it except for when it happens in your circle or on places like this where people gather. I can't understand why we don't talk about it more, pay it more regard and I guess I was thinking is it because the names we use let us off thinking about it? But then Lunaticfringe you make the excellent point that the naming of things doesn't matter all that much in the face of the event itself.

Greater awareness might help though - how many posts have I seen on here from women whose babies have gone a bit quiet - and who are sitting at home wonderng if anything's up? I agree though - and I'm very glad that I'm not planning any more babies because knowing what's happened to my friends it does take away that protective innocence you have - that things like that don't/won't/can't happen. We all need that - but if it's blinding us to one another's pain then maybe we should be jolted out of it?

I had a mmc at 13 weeks which was horrible but no way the same as my friend whose DD died in labour. That to me is a real 'stillbirth' although I can imagine that losing a baby at 20-30 weeks is as awful.

I hate the idea of a hierarchy of grief though. I'm a bit on the fence I suppose.

I have had 3 MCs varying between 5,8 and 12 weeks and although horrendous nothing compared to what i m suffering now after having given birth to my beautiful still born daughter 8 days ago at 41+1 weeks old.

We had named her,bought a load of clothes and nursery stuff.All our future plans involved our daughter whereas with the MCs we'd never got that far.We feel we have no future now.We are now having to plan her funeral.Its crap.

I had an mmc at 13 weeks. I tell people that my baby died. I have also had a 5/6 week loss. That one I consider a miscarriage.

It is a horrible dark time, that lets face it, if more women knew the actual odds of losing a baby there would be so many more hysterical posts on sites like these.

I never knew the likelyhood of losing one of my babies was so high. Let alone two.

Oh Lousiesh.
That is so horrible for you and your family. I am so very sorry for your loss.
Dont give up hope. You can and will have a baby.

Louise and LunaticFringe
So very sorry for your losses, what a terrible thing to happen to you both.

MN is so very good, I think, as a meeting place for women who have gone though the bereavement of a child or a miscarriage. I wish that I had known of MN when I had my miscarriages.

I was "lucky" in that they were in early pregnancy, but all of a sudden I heard from friends and colleagues who had also suffered losses. It is still not really talked about.

I think that it would be good if MN could campaign for a better understanding of miscarriage and stillbirths, whatever terminology is used - there are far too many stories on MN where posters have been badly treated. There was a campaign but not sure if it is still up and running.

IMO it does not matter what you call it.

I have had 11 MCs the last one at 24 weeks.

The consultant said the baby had been dead for a few days, he would be happy to record it as a MC if I did not want all the legal complications of a still birth.

I thought it would be easier on my DDs age 14 and 12 so I chose MC.

I think when a baby is a fully formed baby that has to be delivered, then it is much harder.

There are probably three stages MC late MC and still birth.

But it sounds like the gold, bronze or silver in the misery awards.

I really can see no lodgical reason for changing what it is called it will not diminish the pain people suffer, or bring them back.

I think the problem with using miscarriage for second trimester losses is that people don't realise that you've had to give birth to a dead baby. I've had a termination for a fatal condition at 17 weeks followed by a miscarriage at 18 weeks and most people I know seem to think I was put under general and the baby somehow discreetly removed. They don't realise I've had 2 labours and held 2 babies. Using the term misccariage seems to me to deny my experience and their existence. The term stillbirth is very clear - and actually now I'm thinking about it quite a moving term. ALthough actually it shouldn't matter what people think it does in that I want my babies to be acknowledged as babies.
But again I don't feel my losses could compare to one at term or close to term.
There really needs to be a third term for the grey area - late miscarriage doesnt' really cover it.

But then what does it matter really - as Lyn says, whatever we call it, it doesn't bring any of our lost babies back does it?

My early miscarriage was one of the worst experiences of my life - because I was 40 and had been trying to conceive for years. I thought it was the end of my dreams, and couldn't face the thought of my future.

Still, no question, it would have been worse, way worse, to have miscarried later. When women tell me about their late miscarriages or stillbirths I go cold with horror.

Clinically, too, I think it is a useful distinction.

Surely the problem is not the naming, it is people's insensitivity and ignorance about what it means to lose a child. I'm not convinced that renaming will help with that.

peanuthead I think you are spot on. I have just lost a baby at 20 weeks and really struggle with the term MC for it. As you say, it doesn't convey to people the experience you have of giving birth to your lost baby. It also (to me) doesn't acknowledge that the baby will likely have been held, named, given a funeral, a grave etc.

It is a very different experience to early MC, but they are both the loss of a baby, as indeed is a stillbirth.

I don't know what the answer is, but I do feel a need to spell out what has happened to me to people to try and "justify" my grief, and the time I need to take off to deal with it.

Out of interest, does anyone know at what stage of pregnancy a MC is dealt with by inducing labour, rather than an ERPC?

Hope it's ok to comment on here, but I think this is important. Miscarriage itself is a horrible and very outdated word. My friend lost her baby a few months ago and she said the term itself makes it sound as if she'd done something wrong. I thought that was terrible.

Just want to thank everybody who has shared their thoughts and their stories. It's very sad but also very interesting to read and I'm even more in two minds now - clearly as the littleredpumpkin has said words are important - but as others posters have pointed out - in the context of this loss - not important at all. It's all very hard.

Honestly though - before I had children I thought stillbirth was a Victorian thing that didn't even happen anymore. If wishing made it so...

I had a miscarriage at 12 weeks and whilst it has been - and continues to be - terribly upsetting, I feel it is in no way comparable to my friends who have suffered stillbirths. I'm not belittling the distress of losing a baby at any stage. I know, as a mother, that from the moment of a positive pregnancy test you begin to make room in your life for your baby, but this becomes magnified further still once you feel your baby move and get to know him/ her. There is also a vast difference between an early miscarriage and having to give birth to a child you know is not going to live.

We all suffer grief in very different ways, but there is an archaic idea that past the 12 week point you are out of the woods. I agree with LittleRedPumpkin's comment that the outdated terms used for loss have a tendency to make you feel as though you have done something wrong. I feel much the same about the fact that I had a blighted ovum. What a hideous expression that is. I tend to say I lost a pregnancy - otherwise I find myself feeling both fraudulent and guilty of mourning a baby that never was.