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

Original poster

Anti -D jab really necessary?

29 replies

negrilbaby · 11/02/2010 16:56

I'm Rh -ve as is mu husband. As far as I can find out that means there is no risk to any baby, and so I don't need the ante-D jab. When I said this to the mw she waffled on about something being passed down by other members of the family. What I think she really meant was that I could be lying about who the father was so they will give me the jab anyway. Am I right in my suspicions? I don't want to make a fuss but I can't see the point of having an injection for no valid reason.
Has anyone else been in this position?

OP posts:

Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

DaisymooSteiner · 11/02/2010 16:59

Well, either she doesn't understand the heritability of rhesus factor, or yes, she is allowing for the possibility that your husband may not be the baby's father (up to 10% of babies are fathered by men not the mother's partner iirc, so not an unreasonable thing to think really) If you are certain about your dh's rhesus status and he is the father then there's no chance of your baby being Rh+ve and no need to have the jab if you don't want it.

thedollshouse · 11/02/2010 17:01

It isn't necessary if you are both negative. Get your dh's blood tested again just to make sure.

A similar thing happened to a friend of mine both her and her husband are negative but the midwife insisted that she have the anti-d injection. The midwife said that 25% of women don't actually know who the father of their child is so they routinely give the anti-d to be on the safe side.

Pingpong · 11/02/2010 17:04

I had an ectopic pregnancy first and was given Anti D. For my DD I was given Anti D at 28 weeks and then after birth waited for her blood results and as she had my blood type so didn't need it again.
When we moved house I found my DH's blood donor card - he only went the once and couldn't rememember what he was. He is also Rh neg so I have declined anti D this time. MWs have commented at various points including when I had an amnio. I have put a note in my antenatal book that I decline the anti D as my husband is also Rh neg.
I think your mw is talking nonsense and what you suggest is more likely the case. Sadly I do think it is true that a lot some women lie about the father of the baby (especially if you watch Jeremy Kyle!) BUT as an adult you can refuse to take the injection. I certainly agree that there is no point having an injection for no valid reason.
If I had any doubts at all I wouldn't hesitate to have the injection but I know that DH is definitely the daddy.

Original poster

negrilbaby · 11/02/2010 18:38

I'm going to stand my ground and refuse the jab then. I had them with DS1 and I know they are not pleasant - and had my suspicions about the necessity of them then. I did as as was told though - as I did throughout the pregnancy but I am feeling a little more empowered this time so will say no. I am positive about the father - if a little surprised the pregnancy happened at all - almost immaculate conception! Certainly didn't have the time or inclination to sleep with anyone else!
Thanks for putting my mind at rest.

OP posts:

hackneyzoo · 11/02/2010 18:47

I am rhesus negative and so is my DH, consultant and mw agreed in both of my pregnancies that anti D was not necessary if you are both neg.

Wonderstuff · 11/02/2010 18:57

I am Rh- and am certain this is my last pg so am declining the anti-D jab. I have spoken to two midwives neither of whom seemed to really understand the factors surrounding when it is appropriate to decline the jab.
One told me I needed it at 28 weeks to protect this baby and the other was worried declining it would affect me having blood transfusions.

Did find out while researching though that ORh- blood is particulary special as in an emergency anyone can be given it - we are universal donors, so definitly worth looking at being a donor after baby is 9mo.

pagwatch · 11/02/2010 19:00

I declined the anti D with my last pregnancy for several reasons including that I knew it would be my last.
The initial reaction was 'that isn't allowed as women tend to change their minds'...

Didn't have it

Pingpong · 11/02/2010 19:47

no disrepect you your decision pagwatch but knowing the father is also rh neg is very different to knowing it will be your last baby. Accidents do happen afterall.

Pingpong · 11/02/2010 19:56

to your decision - sorry should have previewed

Wonderstuff · 11/02/2010 19:57

Surely Smac they are both valid reasons for refusing anti-d though? One can ensure accidents don't happen surely.

tartyhighheels · 11/02/2010 20:01

Can i ask what is the objection to having anti d? apart from the fact it stings like f--k

Bumperlicious · 11/02/2010 20:07

If you DH is positive do you definitely still need it?

Pingpong · 11/02/2010 20:12

Just my opinion wonderstuff know of quite a few friends who said they were stopping at 2 and then had an accidental 3rd. How bad would you feel if there were complications from not having anti D jab. I know I would feel bad.
I don't know all the stats but apart from sterilisation or abstinence what contraception is truly 100% effective?
and this site even states that male sterilisation isn't truly 100%

Lymond · 11/02/2010 20:15

tartyhighheels - its a blood product. (Which is why when you say no to it, some medics assume you've said no for religious reasons and are JW, and that you'd also decline blood transfusion).

I've declined it always as DH is also Rh-, and I don't want to take the however-slight-risk of receiving a blood product. In the way that I wouldn't accept a blood transfusion unless I really needed it!

pacinofan · 11/02/2010 20:16

I declined the anti-d too after the birth of dd2 - was my last child, although dh (the father of both my children) is rh+, we knew we would not have any more children. As there is a risk in receiving anti-d, albeit small, there is a risk nevertheless and I declined on those grounds. I recall a terrible tragedy in Ireland where the anti-d was not screened properly and women got hepatitis - mistakes happen, in my opinion I didn't need it. The hospital were unhappy with my decision not to have it, I said I was happy to reconsider if they could tell me where the anti-d came from and where it had been screened. They couldn't, so I declined. I know there are good reasons to have it, but I really think it depends on your personal circumstances.

Wonderstuff · 11/02/2010 20:25

Fair enough, but I think there is a difference between feeling you have finished your family and knowing really that an accident wouldn't be the end of the world, and being very certain that you will not under any circumstances be having anymore children, . My reason for declining is that it is not needed and I found it stressful and painful to have last time. I was happy to have it during all my other pregnancies, knowing I was likely to have more children. I am very sure I don't want to go through another pregnancy after this.

tartyhighheels · 11/02/2010 20:26

I just wanted to know because i have had it everytime becuasse i do have a rh+ husband - i too would refuse if he was negative just because no point in having somthing you don't need.

I would never take the risk of not haivng it even if i thought i wasn't going to have another baby.

Lymond · 11/02/2010 20:34

Apparently its also very expensive (don't know how expensive exactly, an obstetrician friend told me this) so all of us who know we don't need it are doing the NHS a favour!

ArthurPewty · 11/02/2010 20:49

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

MumNWLondon · 11/02/2010 23:04

Firstly if partner is Rh- then as long as you are sure its his baby then you don't need it at all.

Secondly its about protecting the next baby not this one, although from what I have read the risks of missing the 28 and 34 weeks jabs are pretty small, its the one after the birth thats more important and many hospitals will agree to test the baby's rh factor before giving the injection - this must be a good compromise surely (ie declining at 28 and 34 weeks and only having the one post birth if the baby is def rh+).

TBH I found it took 1 minute and stung for 5 mins, hardly worth refusing even though not having any more?

Apprarently also there is a test they can do (on your blood) to determine what the baby is but this test costs more than the injections so they just give the injections...

sheepgomeep · 12/02/2010 10:30

This is really interesting.

Can someone explain how you inherit the rh- gene then please.

I'm orh-, both my ex and my dp are orh+. My first two children (my exes children)were rh- but my dd2 (with dp) was rh+. I am expecting my 4th child and have no idea what this one will be.

I fully expected dd2 to be orh- like me and her brother and sister but she isn't.

My dad also never knew what blood group he was. My mum went nuts when my first child was born and said the doctors must have made a mistake about ds orh- status but wouldn't tell me why but if my dad was orh- neg like me then I would have been his biological daughter right?

Or can the rh-gene skip generations and can people carry recessive genes for it??

Lymond · 12/02/2010 10:59

womanA has rh+ from father and mother

that makes her rh+
All her DC will be RH+, whomever she marries, because they'll inherit at least 1 rh+.

womanB has rh- from father, rh+ from mother
that makes her rh+

She married manB. He has RH+ from father, and RH- negative from mother. That makes him RH+.
Their DC can (randomly) get either the RH+ or RH- from each of them. If the DC get two rh+, or 1 rh+ and 1 RH-, then they're RH+. If they get the RH- (A 25% chance, or less? maths not my strong point!) from each parent then they are RH-.

womanC has rh- from father and mother

that makes her rh-

She has a high chance of having RH- babies, if ManC is rh-/rh-, or rh-/rh+. But if he's rh+/rh+ all her DC will be RH+

That makes sense in my head but may not do so typed out!

Lymond · 12/02/2010 11:07

So sheepgomeep, you're womanC above.

Sheeggomeep has rh- from father, rh_ from mother

SGMex must be rh+ from one parent, rh- from other.

So DC1 & DC2 got rh- from you and his rh-.

SGMdp is either rh+/rh-, or rh+/rh+, as DC3 is rh+ and we know she got a rh- from you.

Someone else can work out the odds of what your dC4 is likely to be!

I'm rh-, as is DH, so if I were ever to have an affair and get pg, I need to choose someone RH- if I want to get away with it

sheepgomeep · 12/02/2010 11:36

my mum orh + though

MumNWLondon · 12/02/2010 11:46

If both your parents are Rh- then you will be Rh-.

But 2 Rh+ parents (like my parents) could have a Rh- child (like me). This means that they both must have one Rh+ and one Rh- gene. The Rh+ is dominant so they both are Rh+, but have 25% chance of a Rh- child.

I did look into this in more detail when I was pregnant with DD. My DH who is Rh+ could have been tested to see whether he was Rh+/Rh- or Rh+/Rh+. if the later all our children would be Rh+. if the former then its 50:50.

Flip

1 2