How many sonograms will you get?

[TexasHopeful]

I was looking at the paperwork and such from my OB, and they are only going to do 2 before full term! I want to see the baby more than that! The first U/S was at 6 wks (we thought it was 8, but we were off on our count). The second will be to determine the sex of the baby. Otherwise, they just use the dopplar.

Do some OB's do more? Should I find a different OB or just request more u/s? I found this one online, so I'm not that attached yet. I'm also trying to find out if anyone is from the North Fort Worth, TX area, and have someone good to recommend.

Thanks ladies!!

[la mamita]

That sounds about right. One early ultrasound to date the pregnancy, if you don't know when you ovulated, and one around 20 weeks to check for any major abnormalities (heart defects, etc). Depending on the practice, some do a late ultrasound to figure out positioning, but a good midwife or OB should be able to feel and see what position the baby is in. I know some mamas reject all ultrasounds because they worry about overexposure or overstimulating the baby, plus many HB midwives don't require them.

[Mamatoabunch]

I think two U/S in pregnancy is prudent and quite responsible. There seems to be an overuse of U/S these days. Many/most OB's do many more. There really is little point IMO and IME. I had many, many U/S w/ my first pregnancy, twins, and it did nothing to improve their or my outcome, in fact they found "problems" or potential problems which never materialized into reality. I won't be having any myself this pregnancy and skipped them w/ most of my other pregnancies.

[BHappy]

Originally Posted by la mamita

That sounds about right. One early ultrasound to date the pregnancy, if you don't know when you ovulated, and one around 20 weeks to check for any major abnormalities (heart defects, etc). Depending on the practice, some do a late ultrasound to figure out positioning, but a good midwife or OB should be able to feel and see what position the baby is in. I know some mamas reject all ultrasounds because they worry about overexposure or overstimulating the baby, plus many HB midwives don't require them.

Originally Posted by Mamatoabunch

I think two U/S in pregnancy is prudent and quite responsible. There seems to be an overuse of U/S these days. Many/most OB's do many more. There really is little point IMO and IME. I had many, many U/S w/ my first pregnancy, twins, and it did nothing to improve their or my outcome, in fact they found "problems" or potential problems which never materialized into reality. I won't be having any myself this pregnancy and skipped them w/ most of my other pregnancies.

[mama_daba]

with my son i only had one but that was my choice. with this baby i will also have one it will probably be after 20 weeks. i am having a home birth though and i choose not to do a lot of routine testing done for hospital births.

[kawa kamuri]

I may get a NT scan as well as the 20w.

[Smokering]

Just the anatomy scan. I know about the study that says routine ultrasound doesn't improve outcomes, but it doesn't make sense to me. I mean, I personally know of several people who picked up conditions on the 20 week scan, ignorance of which would have been disastrous - things like omphaloceles or heart defects that required immediate surgery after birth. So I'm thinking quite a lot of babies must be saved by that prenatal detection. So... if it doesn't improve outcomes overall, does that mean that the ultrasound itself is so harmful it kills as many babies as die of all those conditions? But nobody claims that. So - I don't get it. I realise false positives can happen, but I don't see how that would generally be harmful to the baby - unless of course the mother aborted, but would they include that in the study? I dunno. It just seems worthwhile to me. (And my sister had a heart defect, albeit a non-serious one, so I guess that sways me as well.)

[prothyraia]

2 is pretty standard- with my oldest I started with an OB (switched to a CNM later). One at the first visit, one at 20 weeks.

With my second and with this one, we're not doing any scans unless there's some indication that there's an issue we need to look at.

[prothyraia]

Originally Posted by Smokering

Just the anatomy scan. I know about the study that says routine ultrasound doesn't improve outcomes, but it doesn't make sense to me. I mean, I personally know of several people who picked up conditions on the 20 week scan, ignorance of which would have been disastrous - things like omphaloceles or heart defects that required immediate surgery after birth. So I'm thinking quite a lot of babies must be saved by that prenatal detection. So... if it doesn't improve outcomes overall, does that mean that the ultrasound itself is so harmful it kills as many babies as die of all those conditions? But nobody claims that. So - I don't get it. I realise false positives can happen, but I don't see how that would generally be harmful to the baby - unless of course the mother aborted, but would they include that in the study? I dunno. It just seems worthwhile to me. (And my sister had a heart defect, albeit a non-serious one, so I guess that sways me as well.)

I think some of the issue is that (assuming the mother was planning a hospital birth anyway) early detection changes the way the pregnancy is managed in way that ends up causing almost as many problems as it solves. I.e. docs may want to deliver earlier, and by c-section, both of which are associated with more complications. Throw in the false positive which still have the extra interventions, and you can see how things start to even out.

What I would find really interesting would be some studies attempting to look at which specific situations/risks/backgrounds *do* benefit from ultrasound scans. Because "well sometimes it helps, but it doesn't really help at a population level, so sometimes it must be harmful, but we don't know how to tell whether it will be helpful or harmful for you particularly" isn't exactly great information on which to base a decision

[OrangeMoon]

Zero, and I feel a million times more relaxed already than I did with my last pregnancy.

[Cutie Patootie]

Most likely just the 20 week scan. I don't feel comfortable with any more than that. I will do an 8 week if I have bleeding or feel there is cause for it.

[gwerydd]

probably one. I had five with my dd because of PIH and Pre-e. They were hoping to detect IUGR if it occured. I had two with ds, one at 20 weeks and one at 34 weeks, although I belive that one was unnecessary, my back up OB wanted it. I want one to check on the position of the placenta. I'm a VBAC and I want to make sure that placenta accreta will not be an issue.

[jbailey313]

I am only having one and honestly didn't want to have any this time! We are working with a midwife and hopefully having our first homebirth! We are thrilled! I didn't think I was going to have to have an u/s.... but the midwife will probably recommend one at 22 wks a 2nd level u/s b/c I had one with each of my other children (which were fine) but we have spina bifida in the family on my hubby's side.

U/s is not without complications, even though it is a safer avenue, it can still lead to pre term birth is what my midwife told me among other things and she does not recommend one unless there is something she cannot find out any other way!

It is funny b/c with my first I had 4 u/s before 30 wks and Then starting having more b/c of preterm labor at 32 wks and had her at 33.5. My son I had 2 u/s full term baby at 37 wks. This one we will see.....

It is very exciting to see a baby on u/s I will not lie but after 2 births, I just want to take a different approach with this baby this time.

[jbailey313]

Originally Posted by OrangeMoon

Zero, and I feel a million times more relaxed already than I did with my last pregnancy.

This is exactly how I feel!! Hoping I can work it out to not have any this time too!!

[sagewinna]

We'll likely have no ultrasound done, unless it is medically warrented.

[lguse]

Originally Posted by sagewinna

We'll likely have no ultrasound done, unless it is medically warrented.

I'm right there, too. I had a few last time because my midwives thought I was pg with twins and wanted to check, and then when I was way overdue to check the health of the placenta (dd was born 17 days late). Hopefully this one will come a bit earlier and none will be necessary :-)

[lexapurple]

With last pregnancy I had only one. My first OB did not even offer early dating one and just did anatomy one at 25 wks.
This time around it will be the same.
I would not change otherwise good OBs only because they do just two scans, it is normal practice, more in this situation does not mean better. If you simply want to SEE your baby go to one of those places that are not affiliated with hospitals.

[mountainsun]

Honestly, I cannot believe how many ultrasounds are being done these days. I have seen people with completely normal pregnancies having 3-4 or more ultrasounds, and I am like whaaaaaaaaaaaat!! When I had ds1, almost 7 years ago, my OB did 1 early one, and then the 20 week one.

With ds2, we had 1 around 10/11 weeks, because my midwife could not find the heartbeat with the doppler. Didn't have the 20 week scan with ds2 because everything was all good at the 10 week one. We had a homebirth with him.

this time, I am thinking probably one for us, barring any problems.

Don't be so hasty to want more ultrasounds. They are not really necessary (unless there is a problem) and some might say that they may even be dangerous. Do some homework on this one. Just enjoy your pregnancy, mama

[Evergreen]

My OB's practice likes to do 3.

An early "dating" u/s which I got. I am glad because it made my due date 2 days later than the lmp or conception date and since my babies like to stay in there for a while I am going to use the latest possible due date.

A 20ish week diagnostic which I want.

A 38 week "weight", fluid, placenta check. If the placenta is high at 20 weeks and my fluid is ok I am not getting this one because we all know that late ultrasounds are far from accurate to check weight. Plus my biggest baby was 7 lbs 2 oz and my last two weren't even 7 lbs at 42 weeks so I can't see me growing a gigantor.

I didn't have any with the last baby and while I do not regret that choice at all I now feel more comfortable with the use of doppler and us technology during pregnancy.

I had 3 with my first. The early dating, a 20 week diagnostic and then an optional one a few weeks later that I had to pay for out of pocket because I wanted to know the sex of the baby and she wasn't in a great position during the 20 week. I also used the doppler every appt.

[Mamatoabunch]

Originally Posted by Smokering

Just the anatomy scan. I know about the study that says routine ultrasound doesn't improve outcomes, but it doesn't make sense to me. I mean, I personally know of several people who picked up conditions on the 20 week scan, ignorance of which would have been disastrous - things like omphaloceles or heart defects that required immediate surgery after birth. So I'm thinking quite a lot of babies must be saved by that prenatal detection. So... if it doesn't improve outcomes overall, does that mean that the ultrasound itself is so harmful it kills as many babies as die of all those conditions? But nobody claims that. So - I don't get it. I realise false positives can happen, but I don't see how that would generally be harmful to the baby - unless of course the mother aborted, but would they include that in the study? I dunno. It just seems worthwhile to me. (And my sister had a heart defect, albeit a non-serious one, so I guess that sways me as well.)

Yes if a wee one has a heart defect and it is picked up at the 20 week U/S, that could potentially save that baby's life. I am not speaking of one U/S to determine the general health of the baby, but many subsequent U/S. Sometimes b/c some "problem" is found and it turns not to exist. Or to determine weight of baby which can lead to a cascade of interventions that does effect the baby, inducement and being born before its time or a c/s birth which effects both mom and baby. I know of several instances though where a HB mama never had a scan, had a baby born w/ an issue and was able to easily acquire care for their baby after birth.

My personal story I had many U/S, after a routine U/S that unexpectedly found twins at 16 weeks. First they stated they may not have a separating membrane and be in the same sac, then later, after the twin ball started running and I decided against HB, their weights were too far off, then they were discordant b/c they were identical and there was too much of a weight difference, then they had TTT, then I was hospitalized, then more U/S, including BPP. Each time was a hunt to determine a potential problem or exclude another. Had I chose a HB midwife instead of more medicalized care the direction of my pregnancy would have been different and I would have had much more peace to grow my babies. We found out at 8 years they are in fact fraternal, so TTT was not a possibility.