Anti D needed in early loss or not?

[Fia256]

Ok so I'm currently going through my 4th loss in a row. I had a miscarriage at 7 weeks a couple years ago, then a chemical at 5 weeks, then one at 16 weeks 3 months ago and now I'm having another chemical at 5 weeks.

The 7 weeker we were on holiday abroad, I didn't seek any medical attention as at the time didn't see the point as little anyone could do and just tried to get on with it, needing anti d didn't even cross my mind.

The chemical i didn't bother going to drs as saw no point, had done a quick google over anti d and seemed there was no need before 12 weeks

My recent loss at 16 weeks I was given when they induced me

So now I'm stuck wondering if you are actually supposed to have them even if they are early/chemical pregnancies. I have no idea if I have antibodies built up from the first loss as never asked and it's never been mentioned but I'm now worrying if that's what's caused the recurrent loss. As it's Sunday I feel a bit lost as to who to ask as I don't want to bother 111 or anything!

I'm so sorry you're going through this, Fia
FWIT I didn't have Anti-D when I had a miscarriage. I'm sure someone wiser will come along to confirm soon.
Thinking of you.

I'm sorry for your losses

I've had 4 in a row myself and had anti D for 3 of them. But this was only because I went to the doctor each time and they did it as a precaution. The one I didn't get it for, was my third mc which I dealt with at home as it was spontaneous and I chose not to go to the doctor. They were all between 7 and 10 weeks.

I don't think a baby has a blood flow at that early as there's no placenta as such, so theoretically you wouldn't need anti D. But best to ask your doctor how they do things in your area.

Have you had any tests for your miscarriages? It's a terrible thing to go through so many times. The anti D made it worse for me because I hate needles.

Thankyou both for your replies. My dr said she was going to ring me Monday as I'd phoned Thursday knowing I was going to miscarry as tests were getting lighter and she had said if I bleed over the weekend she'll sort out a referral and investigations etc!

I remember with my first (successful) pregnancy, I had early bleeding and they made a big thing about having the anti d so that's why I feel it seems to be a bit contradictory with needing it or not!

I'm also thinking though, if I had developed any antibodies with the first too losses then surely they'd have shown up when I had bloods taken at my midwife appointments last time?

It's all such a worry and stress but I just don't want to make a big thing of it if it doesn't need to be and waste time!x

I'm a midwife. Sorry for your losses. You only need anti d after 12 weeks of pregnancy which is why you only had it for the 16 week loss. Hope that puts your mind at rest

Oh that's great, It does thankyou @Grumpyoldwoman007