aibu TO think that anyone can have a disabled child, even if the tests come back ok?

[Saint2shoes]

why is it that people think that if they test for this and that and they get the all clear, it will mean they have a "healthy" baby?

it really does my head in.
almost like the new topic about testing having choices in the title. imo it makes people believe there is always a choice.

I know so many children that are disabled because of something that happened during the birth, soon after or in toddler hood.

the amount of children I know whose disability was caused but suspected or proved negilence during the birth is suprising as well and quite often comes down to minuits.
why are there not campaigns for this, surely proper training and staffing could lead to so many lives not being changed.

I have always seen it as a way of pretending tbh. Pregnancy is this swirling time of chaos and worry, tests for this and that guarantee nothing, but it gives that illusion of control, which sometimes is needed to keep you sane.

You are not being unreasonable at all.
I know someone who had all scans offered to her, including extra due to concern about being small for dates, yet her son has downs syndrome and no-one noticed until her was two days old, he is now two years old, and doing very well.
Yesterday, dh's friend asked me if I knew whether I was having a boy or girl, and exclaimed on finding out I had not had the scans, ' but all your kids are ill ( ffs!) and you should find out.' I as politely as I could, without using any blunt instruments, explained that autism could not be picked up in scans, was fuming internally!
I agree about the proper training and staffing, disgusting, but money is more important than people and lives in this society!

agree, testing gives a false sense of security- and of grievance if anything goes wrong

both mine had inherited conditions which only became apparent around the age of 7

bit late to blame the scan operator by then

iirc we were told that you can't expect scans to be 100% accurate

seems fair to me

(and tbh- everything we've been told by consultants after dc's problems became apparent hasn't been 100% accurate either)

agree that money should be spent on
improving safety in delivery instead

I was lucky to be delivered at a hospital with a very good record for delivery and after care; but I met others who had been less fortunate

i think it's called blissful ignorance lol. but actually, i don't think it's necessarily a bad thing. any one of us that has one child with a disability that goes on to get pg again knows how difficult and traumatic the pg is, and how worried you are all the time. i wouldn't wish it on anyone tbh. i would rather they enjoyed their pregnancies in blissful ignorance, and then we'll help them pick up the pieces if and when they find out otherwise.
statistically speaking though, tests or not, the majority of them are going to have babies with no disabilities. life goes on.

so, not unreasonable as such, it's quite sad for us that they don't (need to) know what we know, but probably understandable that they don't dwell on the unlikely possibilities until they need to.

sgloop - I also had that exact phrase "illusion of control" in my mind. I also get a bit about the childhood obesity hysteria - as it affects about 1 in 10 kids. As does speech/language problems. But guess which gets zero media etc attention.....

Of course you are right.

yep Totalchaos i agree more hype about childhood obesity differnace is with obesity it maks for good stories

As for scans yes I did have them with ds not because wanted to know if he would have any disablites refused the tripple test because would not made any differnace to the pregnancy for me ,was more because in my last pregnancy i lost a lot of water early on leading t foetal distress .

Hmm - 'illusion of control'. A great way of looking at it. I had a conversation with a very close old friend recently about testing. She gets exceptionally wound up during her pregnancies and for the most recent one, had an amnio even though the risk (imo) was low 1 in 300 or something. She said 'I couldn't cope'...if her dc had been been born with Downs... of course she didn't realise that was deeply upsetting to me as a mother of an ASD child, who has had to bloody well cope.

My friend is very much an 'in control' person. This is obviously why she gets so obsessed during pregnancy - she has no real control over what is going to happen. Having repeated scans and tests gives her the illusion of control. She has 3 NT children, but I dread to think what would happen if one of them had developed a condition not detectable pre-birth...actually she would just get on with it like the rest of us...

madwomanintheattic I disageree
I think people should be made more aware, in some ways I wish I had been, then maybe it wouldn't have been such a shock.
people know that accidents can happen and cause disability, so why not let them know that this can happen at birth.

I was once approached by a mother in the school playground (the only one who's older than me). We got into a conversation about having babies over 40. She said 'Of course, I was lucky, I had no tests at all with DS and look at him - perfectly normal!' with the implication definitely being that I was the 'unlucky' one. She was genuinely surprised when I told her that pre-natal tests couldn't detect autism and that, as far as I knew there was no correlation with maternal age.

I was kind enough to refrain from pointing out that I've never met a less 'normal' child than her DS

on balance I think I agree with 2shoes. not just with regard to negligence but with all the difficulties - birth trauma, bad tearing etc.

hmm at woman in playground. on so many levels what a crass thing to say.

oh yeah and the stitches........owww

there are plenty of things that cannot be detected whilst pg

dd1 had heart problems and hydrocepahlus that did not have shown up on a scan, and ds has cp which wouldnt have either

so yes anyone can give birth to a child with disablities

my sister had her first child at 27 and he has ds, they didnt find out until he was born, because she wasnt tested due to her age

Was talking about this to my sister. She has no children and isn't sure she wants any, but her partner does. Both are very career-minded. Incidentally, both are brilliant with our kids (one ASD, one probably ADHD/Aspergers)

She was saying something along the lines of, 'I suppose we could go for it, but I'd have to make it clear I want every test going.'

So, I said, have you talked about what you'd both want if the tests showed a problem? Or who'd be, ahem, taking a step back in their career to care for an autistic child? Or one with Downs? Or taking time off when your NT child breaks both wrists falling off a log (though maybe that's just my family).

She seemed really startled at the thought of discussing ANY of this beforehand -- as if having the tests somehow acts to reduce the risk in itself. This is an educated, intelligent, compassionate baby sister woman, who has autism in the family and is in a high 'risk' group for Downs because of her age. It's weird!

nah yr not

BUT

not everyone has AN tests and thinks they won't have a disabled child. I didn't. I had CVS cos I have 50/50 chance of passing on chromo disorders that make DS a walk in the park, comparatively (1 being incompatible with life, the other being life limited)

When my cvs showed normal chromosomes I expected somat else to go wrong - birth trauma, SB, group B Strep, other congenital infections.. And it did. Kind of - ds was born with CMV (virus). This could have led to epilepsy, CP, deafness, liver probs etc etc. Think he's ok but understand he could loose his hearing at any point and he will have audiology checks until he's 5

So for me, I guess 'choices' would mean the choice to avoid continuing a pg where baby has the unbalanced translocation I carry. Nothing more. This would hardly be an easy choice - but I think I would consider termination with everything else that is going on with dd's piss poor health and various complications. We have had 1 week in the past 5 where we haven't been an inpatient in hospital - just had the outpatient appts that week.

Whilst I accept that any pg carries this risk of medical mares(and that's what I fear btw - not the ld or pd)- that is it - its a risk. It's not a dead cert like with continuing a pg that came from one of my scrambled eggs.

However, I don't feel I have a fat lot in common with the majority of posters on the AN tests threads. Lots of stuff I read gets on my tits and if I ever find myself in that situation I'd prolly avoid

Lancelottie - my friend is the same. She is intelligent, kind and very loyal as a friend and yet she seems to have been blinded by science with pre-natal tests and scans. She also said to me recently...'I didn't realise ASD was a disability...' .

People just don't have cause to think about the far reaching effects of any disability their child may have. The wierd thing is, I would have probably been exactly the same if I didn't have an autistic child. It's always a case of 'it won't happen to me'...but when it does, you just adapt - and continue to love your child unconditionally.

Blimey sphil, did you comment on her foot in mouth syndrome?

No - she's a little bit odd tbh and I don't think she meant to be crass - it's just lack of knowledge. Tbh I've often told it as a funny story since - her son is well known in school as being a handful (understatement). Think he probably has ishoos - but she is in complete denial.

riven did she really?!!

omg!