Has anyone refused to have routine tests in pregnancy?

[foreverastudent]

I refused blood tests as I didnt see them as being medically necessary. Had loads of hassle with the hospital about it though.

I did have ultrasounds because I felt that the benefits outweighed the potential risks but would be interested to hear from anyone who refused these?

Does anyone else worry about the possible long term consequences of routine ultrasounds? I know docs say they're safe but thay said that about thalidomide (sp?) and ultrasounds haven't been around long enough to know if there will be effects 50 years down the line.

many people already stop all vaccinations

I'm saying nuffink

Alle01.... so why does the US have an increasing maternal death rate?
"Maternal deaths have fallen worldwide... Countries such as China are making significant progress but there have been surprising increases in others, including the US, say researchers."

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8616250.stm

I seem to be doing less as each pregnancy happens.

The first pregnancy I did all the tests most of which were totally unnecessary.

Second pregnancy I refused some early blood tests, GTT and growth scans and had to decline the growth scan suggestions on no less than five separate occasions and ended with a home meeting with the SOM and someone else from the hospital trying to tell me how essential they were.

Essential despite telling me the results would not affect my pregnancy or labour and they acknowledge that the results are not always accurate...why bother then ? Answer best to do these tests for my peace of mind. I just wanted to be left alone for my peace of mind.

Third (current) pregnancy I have refused the early blood tests & GTT and will be refusing growth scans again.

Currently trying to refuse further anti-c blood tests, i.e. They claim I had this last pregnancy and it wasn't a problem and no testing required. Suddenly 26 weeks into this pregnancy they have changed their minds and want fortnightly testing despite initial tests giving a very very low tilter level (just like last time)...refused two hospital appointments to date. If last bloods taken at home, come back low again next week, I will be ignoring future blood requests too.

Midwives are so paper bound they are so stuck in the hospital protocols. They have no idea why some tests are done, just that it is always done this way They don't understand why a mother wouldn't want to spend days undertaking inaccurate and/or unnecessary tests.

can i point out that i refused because i have an irrational fear that ill have something seriously wrong with me. its because of my over carin of something bein wrong that i've said no...

alle01, you've put it a lot more bluntly than I would have, but I have to say that I agree with you. It frustrates me no end that people think that they are being "progressive" in refusing medical interventions which, more often than not, are for their benefit and that of their child. I look at my counrty of origin and wish that, for every woman here who seems to think that doctors and the NHS are out to "get them", I could bring in women who would be a lot more appreciative of the wonderful care provided to those here.

As for those who refuse routine STI testing, words fail me What harm can do that, versus the harm that could be done to your baby if you do have an STI that could seriously affect them during and after birth?

"all these test are done for your benefit"

In your opinion. I find myself pressured into tests which are not being done to benefit me or my baby. Waste of NHS resources IMO. Better we only test the women who need to be tested rather than blanket tests for no reason.

I didn't have any screening blood tests as it would have made no difference to what we would have done. I did have US, twice in first pregnancy, 3 times in the 2nd and regularly in the 3rd as I had complications which caused blood in my urine and they needed to check it wasn't also coming from placenta praevia.

I already knew my blood type, (didn't know about other factors changing) and had no STI testing as my dh and I have only ever slept with one another, and neither of us have had any other high risk behaviours for HIV.

I had to have a procedure on my kidney when I was pregnant to insert a stent and as part of that had an x-ray. They protected dd2 with heavy lead aprons but she kicked out at the wrong moment and you could see her tiny foot bones in the picture!

I was never treated like I was doing anything odd, and felt very well informed about the risks/benefits of the x-ray.

asana, only because i have connections who live in undeveloped countries, and know how difficult it is to get medical advice or prescriptions, you could, but most people, couldn't believe how difficult it is to get asthma inhalers in senegal, and i can't live without them, literally, so i get really cross when people don't appreciate what they have just because always been there, and for those thinking i am exaggerating, countries like india have woman dying at childbirth for simple thing as babies being breech and 'silly' things like that,... i do not want to hear the stories about birth tragedies in africa, china happens to have now great antenatal care, chinese friend complaints not enough test her, too much left to chance, i know many woman without access to medical services that would do anything for the antenatal care i am getting, and for the nearly certainty that my child will live to celebrate his fifth birthday, not a garantee in the whole world,... but we are not the same, african child dies aged 4, it happens, such a pity, european child dies aged 4, and we have an enquiry, sack the health visitor, investigate the nhs trust,....
be grateful your country gives a damm about your child.

I had all that were offered- couldn't see any reason not to IMO.
Just as my dcs have been vaccinated (dd had 3rd cervical cancer one yesterday)
Everyone is different- it's a personal thing.

I have all the routine ones. I'm hypothyroid so I have to have regular tests, monthly in pregnancy, for that. I hate needles but have become much better since having had so many blood tests.

I refused the screening ones though.

Asana and Alle01
I'm not really up to a debate this morning but with all due respect vaccinations are very different to screening tests. Where Vacs can prevent disease, screening tests (not talking about scans, which I personally think are useful in detecting things that can be treated) are just there to identify feotal problems that you can't do anything about.

So unless you're planning to have an abortion if the outcome is not what you want, then I don't see why it matters either way whether or not you have the tests. Some people prefer to have them to set mind at ease/have enough time to prepare for the birth in case of issues identified. Me, I just like to go with the flow so no need to stress myself out for 9 months over something I can't do anything about.

Please stop with the Sanctimonious posts comparing with third world countries. I have family from third world countries but I'm also intelligent enough to make the right choices for me and my family. AND save money for the NHS to boot.

Ooh I have one. While pregnant I had a slapped cheek scare at my school and had to have a blood test to check for immunity. If it had turned out I wasn't immune and had contracted slapped cheek, I would have had to have further tests (I'm not sure what) that may have led to a blood transfusion in utero. I had the blood tests without question and thankfully all was well. What would some of you have done?

Sorry I didn't mean to put the word "had", seeing as that is the question! "Would you have agreed to the blood tests?" is my question.

I've started writing many responses to this message board and deleted them all again before pressing the send button. I'm expecting my first baby, but also work in the health profession and have seen more perinatal morbidity and mortality than I can describe.

Not wanting to scare anybody, but when you see babies or mothers die from conditions, and go home thinking- maybe if they hadn't refused this test, we could have intervened earlier- lets just say, reading some of the msgs on this board- its been difficult for me to contain myself.

I agree nobody can force you to have a test done- and there are plenty of women in countries where such tests are not offered and have healthy babies, but also many suffer sometimes fatal consequences.

You would be amazed at how many rare conditions are picked up with some of these tests- not just the more common Rh-ve's or the Down's Syndrome's, but also the anti-kell's anti-duffys, spina bifida, anencephaly, surgical problems like gastroschisis where deliveries need to be planned in a teirchary unit with paediaric surgeons on standby, heart defects that need immediate treatment.

As far as STI's are concerned- how can anybody be 100% sure they do not have one unless they are a virgin or have been tested? Seeing a babies coming to hospital with unusual illnesses that eventually turned out to be AIDS related was enough for me to agree to testing no matter how much I trusted my spouse. And the mothers of these babies were not sex workers or IV drug users (they were the ones less likely to decline testing)- they were nureses, headmistresses etc... women who were 150% sure they didn't have an STI.

I think my viewpoint is bias because i see too much of the abnormal and the tragedies. But there are enough bad things in this world that can happen beyond our control. The few things we can premempt, treat, monitor and minimise risk- I think should be welcomed.

just a clarification, there are things that can be done if not pleasant result in test, and abortion is not the purpose of the test.
why is it uncomfortable to compare with other countries, especially if you understand the conditions?

I agree with everything treedelivery has said on this thread.

Until you have seen a massive obstetric emergency or the death of a mother and baby you cannot possibly understand the full implications of refusing certain tests. Why would anyone refuse a simple test with no negative aspects to it that could ppotentially save you or your baby.

To whoever said only test the women that need it. Can you elaborate? The majority of women I have known to test positive for HIV are the ones you would least suspect.

Your body, your baby, whatever. Just remember, there are things that go wrong and imo it is pretty selfish to your baby if you could have prevented it.

In my first pregnancy I was blase about tests and scans but did have them as I didn't see a reason not to, and I looked forward to the scans as an opportunity to see my growing baby. It was reassuring to know that everything was progressing OK.

In my second pregancy my first scan and bloods revealed abnormalities and conditions that were incompatable with life. I am young, fit, healthy and very 'low-risk', I was just imperceivably unlucky. When you've been on the wrong side of statistics you realise how valuable these tests can be.

Riven, "ridding oneself of a disabled baby" is a pretty offensive turn of phrase.It's not really on to dismiss the motivations, emotions and circumstances of those who choose testing in six words.

A righteous post from Secretsme - thank you.

When I had my 2 babies in Edinburgh, they only did 12 week scans and no more - which seemed quite odd. Would have loved a 20 week scan.

secretsme

Which of the things you mentioned (the anti-kell's anti-duffys, spina bifida, anencephaly, surgical problems like gastroschisis) are picked up by blood tests and which are picked up by scans? If Spina Bifida or Anencephaly is picked up is there actually anything you can do about it or not?

I had no idea that there was any risk from ultrasounds. I just ordered a 12 week one on top of my 15 week one. Maybe I should rethink that.

nappyaddict you raise a good question about conditions that are unearthed during tests. If there is nothing you can do with the information then it is to a large degree pointless, but if it is going to affect your chances of carrying to term or giving birth to a live baby then it's worthwhile as far as I'm concerned.

My first scan and tests for my second pregnancy revealed we were definitely going to lose our baby, it was just a case of days or weeks really. Knowing what was happening to us, and why, was crucial in terms of dealing with the whole heartbreaking situation. It also gave us an element of choice in how to manage the loss of our much wanted child - to leave nature to take its course and go through a late miscarriage, or to medically manage ending the pregnancy. Both hideous options, but knowing what was happening and why, has helped us to start to heal and we know where we stand in terms of trying again.

alle01 I am distinguishing between screening tests and routine tests for iron, STIs, HIV and others that can be easily treated. I also think it's important to do the scans. But why go through tests and then cvs if you're not going to do/can't do anything with the information???