Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Pregnancy

Talk about every stage of pregnancy, from early symptoms to preparing for birth.

Flip

1 2 3

Original poster

pregnancy tests, scans, bloods etc? whats the point?

53 replies

workstostaysane · 06/02/2008 17:57

i mean,
if you are not going to end the pregnancy becuase there is a risk of Down's or any other abnormality, and you know you don't have syphillis, HIV and have been vaccinated for rubella,
why would you have the tests, except to see the pictures?

OP posts:

Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

bundle · 06/02/2008 18:01

in case a congenital abnormality eg heart defect was present that would mean you should deliver in a unit which has the facilities to perform neonatal surgery.

Original poster

workstostaysane · 06/02/2008 18:07

is that detectable at the 11-14 week scan or do you have to have both to detect something like that?

OP posts:

bundle · 06/02/2008 18:10

the 20 week scan is called the anomaly scan but some issues can be picked up earlier I think

Lulumama · 06/02/2008 18:13

tests can forwarn you of a possible issue, so you can prepare for it.

Original poster

workstostaysane · 06/02/2008 18:13

it doesn't mention looking for anything like that in the notes.
but,if you were concerned, you could knock out the first scan and just have the second presumably?

I've been reading a bit about the dangers of ultrasound and its made me a bit nervy of having them.

OP posts:

Original poster

workstostaysane · 06/02/2008 18:14

hi lulumama, but what issues, other than the ones i mentioned could it tell you about?

OP posts:

Lulumama · 06/02/2008 18:14

what are the dangers? i have read things that suggest there might be an issue with repeated scanning, but nothing that concrete...

you don;t have to have the tests

i don;t suppose they go with the philosphy of freebirthing either?

bohemianbint · 06/02/2008 18:15

plus scans pick up things like placenta praevia - where the placenta blocks the exit, which could be pretty life threatening.

LeonieD · 06/02/2008 18:15

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

LilRedWG · 06/02/2008 18:15

Go have the scan - if nothing else it will give you a concrete EDD to work from. listen to Lulumama in all things - she is wise!

Lulumama · 06/02/2008 18:16

as bundle says, there are issues that could be picked up that you might not have considered.

the anomlay scan is very through

admittedly, scans and tests can cause unecesary worry and heartache... it depends how you will feel about any possibly negative information you are given

Lulumama · 06/02/2008 18:17

don't know about wise, but thank you!

i think, if you were going to choose whether to have a 12 or a 20 week scan, then the 20 week scan would be the better one.... although the earlier scan is more accurate in terms of dating IIRC

Original poster

workstostaysane · 06/02/2008 18:23

ooh no, very against the Unassisted childbirth grain!!

The sarah buckley book that lots of people on the freebirth thread mentioned, talks a lot about not knowing the full effects of ultrasound on a foetus. it sends waves to the cells that are in a vulnerable state and we don't know the effect that can have on them.

here is a quote from a radiologist in the UK in 1987:

'the casual observer might be forgiven for wondering why the medical profession is now involved in the wholesale examination of pregnant patients with machines emanating vastly different powers of energy which is not proven to be harmless to obtain information which is not proven to be of any clinical value by operators who are not certified as competent to perform the operations'

also, she quotes a number of studies where 'cell abnormalities caused by exposure to ultrasound were seem to persist for several generations' and also a study involving newborn rats which showed that 'ultrasound can damage the myelin that covers nerves, indicating that the nervous system may be particularly susceptible to damage from this technology'

OP posts:

Original poster

workstostaysane · 06/02/2008 18:26

oh, i think i am increasingly aware that words from lulumama are precious wisdom. (thats not sarcastic BTW)

I'm not concerned about dating particularly. makes no difference to me if dc is born beginning or end of sept. or even october if it feels like it

OP posts:

juuule · 06/02/2008 18:27

I had early scans as I had had several mmc and didn't want to be blissfully thinking I was growing a baby when I wasn't.
I had the anomaly scans for the reasons given by Lulu.
I had a later scan to ensure the baby was happy in there and didn't need to be born early.

Lulumama · 06/02/2008 18:27

1987....? anything more recent?

i think if you are wanting to fully embrace the freebirth philosophy, then scans are not part of it, nor are other tests... would you have your regular ante natal checks...?

i do not have an issue with ultrasound, personanlly, it has been in use for a long time, and i have not seen anything that would convince me the risks outweigh the benefits.

obviously, if you decline any tests, scans or ante natal care, that is your choice.

am not a proponent of free birth, as you know...

i think that some advances in ante natal care are to be welcomed.. but that is my opinion

Lulumama · 06/02/2008 18:29

oooh, thanks for the compliment

i find the area of antenatal care and such like interesting, becasue it is not just the mothers' welfare and wishes but how far into it the well being of the baby is considered...

obv. baby has no rights until it is born, but some ante natal tests can be life preserving for a baby

unless you are embracing the que sera , sera attitude and are prepared to have whatever life throws at you

am far too much of a control freak to go for that !

juuule · 06/02/2008 18:29

I did have low-lying placenta in some of my pregnancies so the scan also checked that it had moved up out of the way of the exit.
My eldest are almost 21 and 18 and I don't think they've been affected by the scans. Not sure how I would know,though.

goingfor3 · 06/02/2008 18:36

For alot of people the 12 week scan is important to show that the baby has a heartbeat and makes the pregnancy feel more real. The 20 scan can show some abnormalites which if known can be treated at birth and also shows the position of the placenta which is very important.

I'm going for my 11th, I think, scan next week so hope it's not doing any damage to the baby!

Buckets · 06/02/2008 18:41

I've just had the nuchal scan and bloods taken but if the odds for Downs come back high I won't even have an amnio let alone a termination. I would be glad to know the odds though because if they are higher we will have more time to research and visualise our possible future. If they are average I doubt I will give it much more thought than most parents-to-be (because let's be honest, most of us just go for the pictures as OP says).

Original poster

workstostaysane · 06/02/2008 18:42

well its not an opinion you hear widely voiced which is why i quoted the book - just to see if anyone thought she sounded like a nutcase.

as you well know lulumama, I do feel that what will be will be, but I would like to know which of the tests can be life preserving for the baby if things are detected by them.

the Michel Odent book - which i've only just started seems to recommend no screening at all during pregnancies,( just lots of singing..?) so that was another reason why i am questioning having the scans.

OP posts:

spicemonster · 06/02/2008 18:46

worktostaysane - there was another thread recently about the value (or otherwise) of scans on here. The OP got a bit pissed off with some of the comments and buggered off. Hopefully you won't do the same but it might be worth you reading it - particularly the end of it because I think there were some people (in the end) who agreed with her.

I'd had a miscarriage in my previous pg plus there were a lot of problems with this one so I had about eight scans and my baby's fine

Original poster

workstostaysane · 06/02/2008 18:50

thanks spicemonster, will go see if i can find it. if only to save everyone repeating themselves!

OP posts:

juuule · 06/02/2008 18:50

Operation saves foot

Operation saves baby's life

and another one

All discovered by Ultrasound.

PortAndLemon · 06/02/2008 18:53

One thing, of course, is to see whether it happens to be twins. For example, breastfeeding an older DC throughout pregnancy (which I've been doing) isn't recommended if you are pregnant with multiples, even by the bibles of tandem nursing.

Plus having had early scans was one reason I managed to stand my ground and prevent the consultant moving DS's due date forward by an entire month, which she wanted to do .

Also I'd had a missed miscarriage before and wanted to know that it hadn't happened again (not strictly necessary for baby's health, but helpful for my mental wellbeing).

I've known people get things like molar pregnancy, which can be dangerous, get picked up at early scans.

I haven't seen any evidence at all that ultrasound has any negative effect on the baby (apart from one study linking increased number of ultrasounds and decreased birthweight... but I'm not sure they reached a conclusion on which was cause and which was effect on that one, and in any event with DS being 10lb 5.3oz after lots of ultrasounds, it's not something that concerns me unduly). In 1987 ultrasounds had only just been introduced as standard (I know my mother and my MIL, who had babies in 1982 and 1983, didn't get any scans as standard).

Flip

1 2 3