did you refuse iron tests, urine tests, bp checks, doppler checks etc?

[nappyaddict]

if so why? i can understand refusing tests that find out abnormalities if you wouldn't terminate anyway but i can't understand why people refuse those mentioned above.

There are a lot of tests that are unnecessary for the vast majority ow women. Trouble is, you can't tell which few are going to have their lives and their baby's lives saved by regular blood pressure monitoring, for example.

Choosing not to have tests is a perfectly valid PERSONAL choice - but it is irresponsible to say that the tests are useless. All you can say is that you have chosen not to have them - just as I chose not to have anomaly scans or blood tests.

And deciding not to have the tests because you don't like the attitude of the person administering them strikes me as the worst type of cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Thanks for the lecture, seeker.

If you read my posts it's because I have extremely valid reasons for not trusting the care here.

I would agree the attitude of a person is irrelevant but their competency is obviously very relevant.

they lose samples. time and again. so who's the know wtf happens to those samples when they go a lab instead of being tested then and there as they are in most places?

how can you trust the results.

they don't follow through after results come back.

they don't pass relevant information on to the GPs or other healthcare professionals.

when the patient phones to chase it up herself, his/her concerns are fobbed off and dismissed.

that is incompetence, as far as i am concerned.

the duties of a healthcare professional include being professional, and that includes addressing a patient's valid concerns as well as efficiency and competence.

leonie you are talking bollocks

diabetes - whether pregnancy related or otherwise - can be fatal if not treated

we are not talking slight rises in blood sugar here - people with proper GD have sugar levels through the roof. They need insulin. End of.

Back to the OP - I loved my antenatal appts. I got a free afternoon off work and a cream cake afterwards . I am a bit of a control freak and I like to know stuff.

Expat your trust sound truly shocking. I never heard of a lab test being needed to prove pregnancy . When I first went to my GP when I fell with dd I was expecting prodding, poking and tests galore but all I got was "Congratulations" and "here's the number for the midwife". Easy peasy, and how it should be.

or tested then and there with no chance of it become lost over and over again or confused with someone's sample because it's travelling over a very long distance, TigerFeet.

then there's the scans.

who does an abdominal scan an 8 weeks pregnant women who's already there with threatened miscarriage?

I'd say that was incompetence in my book too Expat.
I can cope with someone who has a bit of an attitude if they're good at their job...

so can i, VS. anyone with a modicum of intelligence can discern the competence beneath the attitude.

just as anyone with a modicum of intelligence and education can tell when a system is inefficient and inept. so how can you trust it?

would you drive on the motorway in a car you know had a dodgy wheel?

When pregnant with dd and in the UK (I had ds in Italy) they sent my urine sample to lab for pg test. It was inconclusive! so I had to go back for a blood test. I was . For the rest of the pregnancy I was a bit but how little testing is done in this country (I'm talking about non intrusive testing). I can't believe that a scan is not offered routinely in the third trimester.

Only read first few posts, but there was no reason to think my risk factors for pre-eclampsia were high (MIL had it but didnt tell me, sisters went on to have it after me)- if I hadn't ahd it picked up in routine antenatal care DS1 and I would probably be dead by now as it turned into Eclampsia.

I haven't had tests for abnormalities (scans but nothing mroe) as I have sn kids already and couldn't view a child as Sn as anything other than my precious baby, but I would strongly urge anyone who is pg to have the routine tests- the daya fter your baby dies is too late to reconsider.

RE iron and bleeding- the notion of women with naturally low iron bleeding less (ie me!) is something I have encountered before- I haven't checked but am told that AIMs have info on this for people refused a HB becuase of low iron? (as I was with ds3).

Not directed at you expat.

jaynz - what a beautifully written post (your first one). Whilst I know your opinion isn't popular with some people on here, it really struck a chord with me. I also feel we have lost touch with ourselves, and I'm using the time between now and the arrival of my baby (Sept) to get my head in the right place for the big event.

You sound like a wonderful and inspirational person and mw xx

Having a few non-invasisve tests in pregnancy is hardly losing touch with ourselves. It is I suspect for most people a way of keeping themselves informed. I don't personally understand what all the fuss is about. I am 21 weeks and have three ante-natal appointments, hardly excessive. The last one was a visit to the GP and I had to provide a urine sample again no big hardship.

I do think it is important that we are in touch with our bodies etc. I hope to have as natural a birth as possible, with little or no interventation. But I think people seem to forget that when there was less medical intervention and testing was not routine women and babies died.

I agree that some tests are unnecessary to some people but believe that regular urine tests are essential for all women. Midwives should be stresssing the symptoms of pre-ecampsia, gestational diabetes etc.

I developed pre-eclampsia with very few symptoms in less than a week. Without this routine testing dd & I may well not be here.

To my mind refusing non invasive urine tests is bonkers & dangerous.

LeonieD you are truly bonkers if you think gestational diabetes is no big deal.

Being in a ketoacidotic coma isn't exactly good for mum or baby

I agree that across the board screening is not necessary, but as GD can often be present without symptoms then a simple urine dipstick test can be very valuable.

Diabetes is a very serious illness no matter if you're pregnant or not.

Leoni! Where are you getting this?

My FIL has kidney damage from even his very well-managed diabetes, and nerve damage in his hands from pricking himself for blood tests over the years - especially because diabetics have decreased circulation.

He has to take a lot of drugs which have other side effects in addition to his insulin injections.

This thread makes me really sad. I trained for 5 years to be a midwife - I have worked in the NHS for over 30 years and always, always tried to do my best for my patients. Sometimes it is very challenging, and I know it is not perfect, and I do see mistakes being made from time to time. But there is a lot of ingratitude and ignorance on this thread.

I have experienced the death of a baby when the mother absolutely refused induction of labour, despite everyone's best efforts to persuade her - and that will stay with me always.

That's sad 3littlefrogs. But I do think the majority of women appreciate the work their midwives and doctors do.

I also don't like it when medical professionals get accused of scare mongering and bullying when they are simply trying to do their best for their patients.

3littlefrogs, I can say that I have had some amazing midwives and I thank the Lord for them.

Personally I find it hard to put my faith back into a hospital that took me, in floods of tears, begging not to be made to go into surgery, down for a CS with a healthy pregnancy at 39weeks.

I am currently 38+2 at a different hospital with my third and my HCP's have rec'd a CS at 40weeks because of dopplers showing abnormalities of placental blood flow, because they have listened to me, explained things to me and IMO actually tried to help me with my VBA2C I am willing to put my faith in them.

But that's the issue, how much faith can be really be expected to put into a care system that we feel has let us down tremendously in the past?

VS that is assault - and I cannot understand why any health professional would put themselves in the position of potentially being struck off for doing what you describe. Did nobody explain why they were taking the action that they did?

It is really bad for the Trusts statistics etc, not to mention the budget, to carry out an unnecessary CS - it is a hugely expensive exercise compared with a normal delivery. I am aghast.

Ha! Explain?
Because apparently there is no such thing as a safe VBAC and I had 'no option'.

So not an emergency section?

Was it not discussed with you well before 39 weeks? I haven't come across anything like that before.

I have been involved in a few "crash sections" where it was a life or death dash to theatre, but even then we did our best to explain what was going on.

It sounds awful.