Anti-D question

[junkfoodaddict]

When I was pregnant in 2011, I discovered I was rhesus negative. I had my anti-D at 28 weeks and was told that within 72 hours after birth, I would have the anti-D again if baby was rhesus positive.

I had a very traumatic labour and birth (rare, violent contractions due to a pessary reaction, low amniotic fluid during the last 4 weeks - it was only discovered then - a baby not growing, placenta abruption, uterine tear and a baby in distress). Four days after the birth, I asked a midwife what rhesus factor my baby was. i was told he was negative like me. i was reassured.

However, the next day, the midwife came in to remove my staples from my EMCS and said she had to give my anti-D. I was confused and told her what the midwife said the previous day. She looked at her notes and said baby was A-.

I was a little miffed at being given wrong information but I 'let it go'.

Anyhow, it has been bothering me since then and moreso now as we're planning to conceive number 2 in the new year.

Will I be safe to conceive number 2 even if my anti-D was given after 5 days instead of 3?

crikey Thumbwitch!
Do you work in the health industry by any chance? Bloods?????

Thanks for that.

Yes DS was first pregnancy. Nothing been mentioned to me about my anti-d status so will have a good chat with my GP.

They're pretty good.

Now all I need to do is sit back and make sure I am healthy and fit before conceiving!!!

I'm rhesus negative and DS was positive. I had all the injections at the right times but booking bloods this time showed trace anti-D antibodies. Have just been re-tested at 16 weeks to see what's happening now but the results take 2 weeks for some reason. Have been led to believe that if the anti-D antibodies are still there I'll have extra blood tests to monitor the levels and potentially scans to look for anaemia in the baby.

Thanks AJH2007.
Oddly enough that has put my mind at rest. I was imagining the worst - miscarriage, delayed foetal development, disabilities DEATH!!! Could you possibly keep me posted how you go please? Gives me an insight into what to expect.

Thumbwitch, I loved reading all your explanations!
Slightly off topic, but maybe you can answer this --
I've always wondered how I got my rh- . My dad is 0-, whereas my mum is A+; both me and my sister are A- . I thought the negative trait was recessive? How come my dad managed to pass it on to us? Or is this more of a genetics question?

Of course junkfood, will do! I terrified myself with Dr Google at first but a friend who is an obstetrician and latterly a kind midwife calmed my nerves and assured me that serious complications are quite rare, and they will monitor me/the baby closely.

GreatJoan - yes, that one's a fairly simple genetics explanation, luckily!
You are correct, the gene for being RhD- is recessive - call it d for ease.
Your Dad therefore has 2 d - he is dd (as are you and your sister).
To have got 2 d, you got one from your Dad and you must have got one from your mum - so she must have one d and one D (which shows up as RhD+ because you only need one gene to make that D antigen - D is dominant).

So your mum is Dd and your Dad, you and your sister are all dd.

The RhD and the ABO genes are completely separate as well, which is how you've managed to inherit your Mum's dominant A gene over your Dad's recessive O gene. :)

GreatJoan, I am entirely a lay person, but my understanding is that each person has two copies if tge gene, one displayed and one not.

Your Mum must display the rh+ copy but carry the recessive rh-. In order to display rh- your Dad has two copies of the Rh-.

You have inherited one from each, so have ended up with 2 copies of rh- and therefore display the recessive like your Dad.

I hope that is 1) correct 2) makes sense!

Thanks Thumbwitch and Triple!
It sounds vaguely familiar - should have paid more attention to my biology lessons at school