amniocentesis

[Melly]

Hello everyone, hoping that some of you might be able to offer some advice or share your experiences on amnio. I am due to have one tomorrow and will be 16 and a bit weeks. I had an amnio when I was expecting my dd and thankfully all was well. This time round I seem to be even more scared, even though I know what to expect etc. Apart from the obvious worrying about the result, the thing that is worrying me is coping with my dd after the procedure. I've made arrangements for her to stay with relatives tomorrow and over night and will collect her on Friday pm which should give me a good chance to rest as they advise you to do. I'm wondering how long you are at risk after the procedure? DD is toddling now but still has to be picked up, carried up the stairs, lifted into her cot etc etc. Is there anything else I can do to minimise the risks? I am also getting myself into a complete state worrying about the result, which I know I have no control over, I was 37 when I conceived and am 38 now. Would be really grateful to hear from anyone.

Anyway Anais the situation you described could happen with any child. What if, in the future the consultant says to a pregnant woman "I'm sorry Mrs Jones but your child has a high chance of being extrememly hyperactive and demanding, in fact he may even develop AHDH, would you like to terminate the pregnancy now?"

How would you feel about that? It is not just children with special needs that can be hard work you know!

I find this thread so interesting and so difficult at the same time. I have two children who require extra care although they are not disabled they do have special needs.

Firstly please believe me when I say I am not criticising anyones' choice, I may not agree but I recognise it's not my life or my decision.

I cannot understand how a child can go from being wanted to being not wanted because s/he is not 'perfect'. I can understand more why someone makes the choice to have a termination because the baby was unplanned than I can when it is because the baby will need extra care. Ultimately this is a moral argument and it saddens me that we believe it is our right to deny babies diagnosed as being disabled the opportunity to carry on living. Do people then carry on to try and conceive another child and allow that child life if it is 'normal'? Or carry on having terminations if that baby is diagnosed disabled? where does it end? and whose definition of disability is it dependent on?

Actually, I mentioned adoption in my post on Tuesday, Rhubarb!

message withdrawn

Rhubarb, you have made some interesting points. It is true that any of us can have a child who becomes disabled through illness or accident. However, for me there would be a difference from caring for a child that I already knew, and chosing to continue with a pregnancy. I realise that others have different views, and I respect those views.

As regards ADHD, a child with a dignosis of this is recognised as special needs by the education system (in the UK). As are those with Aspergers, autism and a range of other conditions. How much help the school can give, and has funding for is another issue, and another debate.

I agree. For me there is a huge difference between a child who is here and that you know and one that isn't and you don't. There are so many 'potential' children. I have missed out on many of them by using contraception all these years! I'm sure that if I hadn't and had a child ten years ago I would have loved that child and never wished it away and it may well have changed my life for the better, but I didn't and I'm glad. This is a terribly emotive issue but I know I am far from alone in knowing that, given the choice, I would not continue with a pregnancy if I knew that the child was badly disabled. The alternative of going through a whole pregnancy and birth with all its risks and then giving the child up to the care system is not an alternative I would consider for a moment either. I just don't see it as an attack on born children to favour termination in case of disability for myself. As I say, we try to prevent disability but that's not an attack on the disabled either.

robinw - I wrote what I feel from my heart, I don't think life is black and white and can't see why you have made that assumption. You also say that I shouldn't be criticising other peoples' choices I stated the following:
"Firstly please believe me when I say I am not criticising anyones' choice, I may not agree but I recognise it's not my life or my decision."
Did you not read that part???

I wrote what I feel as a conversation - that's what this is - I'm entitled to speak my mind as long as it's in a way that doesn't flame anyone else and I certainly did not do that. You may not like what I feel or think but I do have the right to say it. Your statement "you don't have to live with it so you shouldn't be criticising it" smacks of censure.

I do think a decision to terminate the life of a previously wanted baby because they have a disability is very different from choosing not to carry on with an unwanted pregnancy. I do understand that people make that choice and that's it's traumatic for them, they have my compassion but that doesn't mean I understand.

I know how difficult adoption can be, I had arranged a termination when I was pregnant with my oldest child but decided to continue with the pregnancy and have baby adopted at birth because I felt that I couldn't cope. Social workers carried him out of the hospital when he was just one day old - 7 days later I collected him from his foster mother and brought him home with me - I guess if I'd decided to have a termination instead of going the adoption route my life would be very different - I have no regrets. A friend was in the same situation as me, she had her baby adopted - she has no regrets. I have a friend who had a termination she knows it was the best decision for her. I have another friend who had a termination she grieves for that baby and it has wrecked her life.

Once again very individual choices, I am gaining understanding of these choices through this conversation and that is why we should all be able to speak our minds respectfully without other posters telling us we shouldn't be doing so.

Sorry for the minor rant!! I have an intense dislike of the 'thought police' by all means tell me you don't like what I say, you disagree with me but puhlease don't tell me I shouldn't say it!... climbing down of my soap box now

30 years or so ago amnio's were not around, and many children with disabilities were born and either raised with their families or given over for adoption. 30 or so years ago there was also a lot of stereotyping of disablities, and little the medical profession could do to treat them. For instance my nephew would probably have died as they would not have had the capability to perform his heart surgery, and indeed some surgeons would have refused to do it, seeing it as a waste of time on a child with Downs who would die anyway. There are still those prejudices about today, the father on 'Fighting for Danny' said that when his son was born, they were told "Well, don't they live until they're about 12 now?" and "Some of them can drive a car now you know!"

But attitudes and medical practices have changed. For a person with Downs there are so many more opportunities for them, they can live healthy lives, have a long lifespan and even have children of their own. Having a child with a disability is no longer such hard work as it used to be. There is a network of support now, charitable organisations all over the place and so on.

However now that the amnio has been invented, these children are denied these opportunities. A while back there was talk of screening for all possible hereditary conditions, so the parents could choose a healthy baby. So whilst we may not know if a child has ADHD or ADD until they are about two, they may detect it in the womb. The same with many other mild conditions such as flat feet, a speech impediment, hare lip and so on. In the future, will mothers be given a termination as an option for these too?

And as Cadi has already said, no-one here is criticising. I feel that myself and Cadi have actually tried our utmost to make sure no-one takes offence, even apologising for our views!! So I am sorry if people don't like me for this, or disagree with me, or if I have touched a raw nerve, made someone feel guilty, brought back bad memories, whatever. That is not my intention at all. I just wonder where the line will be drawn. Will we soon be terminating boys in favour of girls or vice versa (as happens in China)? When does it become morally unacceptable?

I see your point, and I understand that you are worried where the line will be drawn. I have similar worries myself. I think that we disagree only on where it is ethical to draw that line, not that the line should be drawn somewhere (IYSWIM). I think it is posssibly misleading to ask about very minor problems such as flat feet. I would find it hard to imagine the mind set of someone who would abort a foetus for that. Extremes are seldom productive examples. The pro choice argument could cite a baby carrying a condition that would be 100% fatal immediatly after birth. Such extreme examples do not add much to the debate, and IMHO just drive the two groups futher appart.

But as I have said before different people have different view points, and I respect them.

Batters , but thanks for your support.

message withdrawn

Zebra - I know I'm going back a few days but have you any references or studies backing your theory that 'older' mothers who conceive babies easily have a smaller risk of chromosomal abnormality in their babies.
I ask because this is related to the field in which I work and I've never heard of this theory - I've tried the usual medical searches etc. but can't find anything to back it up.
Thanks.

robinw - you seem you seem intent on misunderstanding me, you have misquoted me but I guess you know that. I spent time explaining but you've made your mind up.

I don't believe there is a problem with me posting on this thread - I think the problem is yours. I will carry on posting on this thread.

It is refreshing to be able to take part in such a frank and challenging discussion. I am sorry that robinw has misunderstood me and I truly hope that no-one else thinks that I am judging the individual choices they have made, that is not my intention.

This is an emotive subject and one that is difficult to discuss in real life - I think it is really good that we are talking about it, it is thought provoking and I am learning from the discussion.

Conversations do stray from the original post but I would think that this dialogue would be useful to anyone looking for experiences or views on amnio.

DM2:
sorry, I don't have a reference! I suspect the research hasn't been done, and it would probably be hard to do. I heard on the radio that late female fertility is something that runs strongly in families. I read somewhere the theory that women with high late fertility may have better quality eggs. Elsewhere I read that the reason the miscarriage rates go up with age is due to increasing chromosone defects in the embryos. From all that I made the leap that higher fertility might mean better "quality" eggs might mean lower risk of chromosone defects.

I know nothing is guaranteed, but amnio is a big decision, and it would be nice to make it with as much info as possible.

dm2,

I am glad it wasn't just me that failed to find the information. I thought i was losing my touch!

I think the problem with this theory is that we are born with all the eggs we will ever have (unlike blokes who keep on making sperm). So regardless of how fertile you are, the eggs will still be older. And I thought it was the age of the egg that caused the increace in chromasomal abnormalities. But it sounds like a facinating area to study......where can mumsnet get a grant??

zebra - I can understand high late fertility running in families.
That high late fertility women produce 'better' eggs than lower late fertility women is sort-of reflected in the fact that they can get pregnant easier.
But, the pregnancies of 'older' women are more likely to end in miscarriage due to chromosome abnormalities because ( as hmb said ) the eggs are as old as the women is.

Here comes the science bit
The chromosomes in the egg cell are sort-of suspended by micro-tubules from the time that the woman is a fetus(!) until that particular egg gets ready for ovulation. Then the tubules pull the chromosomes to the correct positions for the egg to be properly formed - half of the chromosomes do not go into the egg (so that when the egg meets the sperm which also has half the normal number of chromosomes the baby has the right number of chromosomes IYSWIM ).
If, during the years of hanging around on these tubules, the chromosomes 'fall off' then they do not get dragged to the right part of the egg cell and may not be thrown out of the cell. The baby would then have an extra chromosome (e.g. an extra chromosome 21 would give the baby features of Down syndrome).
So, the likelihood of a chromosome ending up in the wrong place depends on how long it's been hanging around, so older women are more likely to have chromosomally abnormal eggs and therefore more likely than younger women to have miscarriages or chromosomally abnormal babies.

Anyone still awake after that? Thought not!

Cadi please keep posting. It is very thought provoking and you are puting across your views eloquently without offence
Rhubarb thanks for sharing your own very personal experiences. Most of us form our opinions in a kind of theoretical way(at least I do) but you clearly have various family experiences which IMO give more weight to your viewpoint.

dm2 thanks for that - you learn something new every day on mumsnet.
Do you know if there are lifestyle factors in the woman (alcohol, smoking, stress,physical injury or illness , or whatever) which tend to prematurely age the tubules so making chromosome muddling more likely? Or is age the only factor?

I think that posting from mine and Cadi's points of view we have to be very aware that there may be mothers reading this that have had their pregnancies terminated for the very reasons we are stating here. For that reason we do say (I hope you don't mind my including here Cadi, but I think we are along the same lines) that the opinions we express are only our opinions, shaped no doubt by our own personal experiences. Our postings do not have to be read and I don't think we have put anyone off posting. The only person we seem to have offended so far is RobinW - well I will apologise for that RobinW. I just hope that one day someone will read our posting and whatever they decide to do about an amnio, they might be better informed about their choices if the test is positive. After all, you cannot have a discussion about Amnio's without hearing the other side of the coin can you? Otherwise the conversation is just narrow.

Anyway, I don't think there is anything left to say on the subject. Good luck to all those who are thinking of having amnio's. It is not an easy decision to make, so I wish you all strength and hope that the outcomes are good ones. x

And thank you, Rhubarb and Cadi, for your contributions. This has been a thought provoking thread and I've been very interested to read about your experiences and not at all offended.

jasper - all the research I've read (so far) has found that age is the only significant factor (apart from a tiny tiny tiny percentage of women who have a genetic 'tendancy' towards chromosome disruption).
I believe that in general, the lifestyle factors especially smoking, are most likely to cause DNA damage that,in theory, may be DNA of an egg (or sperm) cell. This may lead to an increase in other congenital disorders but not chromosome abnormality. This isn't my field so I'll go have a search to see if anyone's studied it.

thanks dm2.
I have led a clean life (ahem!)but am ancient so at least I am aware of the risks should I decide three kids born in three years is not enough