Who's not having an ultrasound? And what are the pros/cons in your opinion? - Page 2

[Mama Metis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mambera 

Wha?  There's a ton of research out there on this topic.  I just put 'prenatal ultrasound safety' into PubMed and got 5 pages of results. ??

Yeah this. Ultrasound has like fifty years of safety data. Ultrasound might not be 100% safe, but in the same way that nothing in life is. That said, on the population level it doesn't show a lot of benefit either, so I think it is really a matter of individual preference. I opted for one because I like to have information, and in small part because I'm planning a home birth. 

[WayfaringMama]

Initially, I had an ultrasound to find out the sex but discovered I have placenta previa. Maybe my midwife would have detected it, maybe not but I am really glad I know now. I think I'll always get at least one ultrasound for this reason alone. 

[~~Sarah~~]

I've decided not to have ultrasounds in my pregnancies, unless a strong indication for one presents itself. I've seen them cause so much worry and undue stress. It is all too often the beginning of the cascade of interventions. Alternately they can cause a false sense of security, and frankly I can do either of those in my own head - I don't need any help! lol. 

[ArcticRose]

Originally Posted by mambera View Post

Wha? There's a ton of research out there on this topic. I just put 'prenatal ultrasound safety' into PubMed and got 5 pages of results. ??

Yeah this. Ultrasound has like fifty years of safety data. Ultrasound might not be 100% safe, but in the same way that nothing in life is. That said, on the population level it doesn't show a lot of benefit either, so I think it is really a matter of individual preference. I opted for one because I like to have information, and in small part because I'm planning a home birth.

There is also data showing that the increase in the use of US over the last 20 years corresponds with the increase of autism. Do US cause autism? No clue. But the possibility that they do makes me not want more than absolutely necessary.

I am getting an US this week. I didn't have one during my first pregnancy until I went into early labor at 32 weeks. The outcome of my pregnancy would not have been different if I had known what was going on, so why do I want one this time? Peace of mind. The trauma of finding out about my daughter's partially formed twin just before giving birth to him makes me need to know what is going on in there. I know it won't provide all the answers, and may cause me more stress, but I have to know this time.

I have 100% chance of being stressed due to my previous experience. It's possible that an US will ease that stress considerably for me.

[Bobbieintx]

I don't log on very often, but did this afternoon, and saw your post to the ultrasound question.  We had a daughter last year in November.  At my 18 week ultrasound, they found a nuchal fold of 4.5, and sent me to a specialist, who read it as 5.1 mm.  I was very upset, because they didn't even tell me it was the nuchal fold they were reading, only something that wasn't right.  Anyway, the doctor told me I didn't have much time to waste, because to "redirect the pregnancy"  couldn't occur past 21 weeks in Texas.

Needless to say, I was nauseated, and left, never to return.  I did go to a specialist my MW really likes and he looked the baby over very carefully, didn't see anything!

However, my daughter had a pulminary stinosis (sp??).  What the experts don't tell you, is that the nuchal fold doesn't measure anything about Downs. It measures the fluid in the back of the neck, and if there is too much, there is a great chance that a baby can have something wrong in the heart.  Swelling around the heart actually reaches the neck area too. 

Half of DS children have heart defects.  That's why they say it's a marker for Downs.  Children without DS, but with heart defects have the marker too, but not all the time!  And many heart defects can be corrected surgically.  It's not all bad to know, if your baby's going to need a specialist.  Just the attitude SOME people have about any defect is so negative.

So my question is, Why are we looking at the baby?  If you would not use the information at all, it's not worth the headache.  That would be the first two trimesters, for my DH and me.  Taking a look if there is something causing concern, to save the baby, is a real reason to go for it.  Then you could have the right medical professionals at your birth, which is what happened to me!

I ended up having Pre-E, and the baby was delivered early, with the use of ultrasound.  She is little, but strong, and we are grateful to have her with us.

Bobbie, mom to Isabella

[mkmoro311]

It was very easy for my Midwife to tell which position the baby was in, she would just wedge her hand into my pelvis to feel for the nead and then the side for the babies back.  Most of the time it was uncomfortable, but worth it to not have the ultrasound.

Originally Posted by IdentityCrisisMama 

I would LOVE to know the position of the baby for sure but that's the only downside I can come up with for now (we decided in the end that we really didn't want to know the sex afterall).  

[IdentityCrisisMama]

Yea, I know that most MW can tell.  I may have an odd belly or just odd MW but I didn't get a "for sure" from either of my MW (lots of experience for both).  

[Jenivere]

I had two with my first who was born in a hospital and none with my next three who were homebirths.  This time around I was leaning towards having one because everything was so different and I felt something was wrong. The day before I was going to have one I ended up in the ER and then surgery for an ectopic pregnancy.  I now only have one functioning tube left and should I get pregnant again I will have an U/S at 6 weeks to find out wether it is ectopic or not so that I can use methotrexate to desolve the egg and avoid another ruptured tube. 

[Andreavstevens]

I wish I could be one of the moms who said "I didn't have an ultrasound for my first baby and everything went well," but I'm not. My husband and I planned on a home birth and went through the pregnancy classes, but 6 weeks before our due date I started having contractions and ended up in the hospital for preterm labor.  This is when we had our first sonogram.  It turns out our sweet little peanut had gastroschisis.  Basically, her intestines were outside her abdominal wall.  Thankfully, all has turned out well and after 8 weeks in the NICU we have a healthy, chunky 6 month old baby without so much as reflux to complain about. 

So here is my dilemma.  Should we have gotten the 20 week ultrasound to find out about the defect in her abdominal wall? My husband says yes.  It would have been better to be prepared and have done our research instead of being plunged into making some very serious decisions in a few hours' time.  Or was it better to have a great, stress free pregnancy for 34 weeks? 

We had no family history to necessitate an ultrasound and thought we were doing the best possible "trust your body" approach to having our baby.  I now know we will have ultrasounds for future pregnancies.  As for advice to other parents, I'm still on the fence.  I would hate to have another family experience what we went through, but also understand not wanting to expose your baby to anything that isn't necessary.  As for us, we'll just play it safe for now.

[noahs.mom06]

Originally Posted by Andreavstevens 

I wish I could be one of the moms who said "I didn't have an ultrasound for my first baby and everything went well," but I'm not. My husband and I planned on a home birth and went through the pregnancy classes, but 6 weeks before our due date I started having contractions and ended up in the hospital for preterm labor.  This is when we had our first sonogram.  It turns out our sweet little peanut had gastroschisis.  Basically, her intestines were outside her abdominal wall.  Thankfully, all has turned out well and after 8 weeks in the NICU we have a healthy, chunky 6 month old baby without so much as reflux to complain about. 

So here is my dilemma.  Should we have gotten the 20 week ultrasound to find out about the defect in her abdominal wall? My husband says yes.  It would have been better to be prepared and have done our research instead of being plunged into making some very serious decisions in a few hours' time.  Or was it better to have a great, stress free pregnancy for 34 weeks? 

We had no family history to necessitate an ultrasound and thought we were doing the best possible "trust your body" approach to having our baby.  I now know we will have ultrasounds for future pregnancies.  As for advice to other parents, I'm still on the fence.  I would hate to have another family experience what we went through, but also understand not wanting to expose your baby to anything that isn't necessary.  As for us, we'll just play it safe for now.

That is so interesting that we had almost the same experience! We found out at 28 weeks though. I personally am very glad that I waited until 28 weeks to have the ultrasound, because I had the pregnancy I wanted for the first 2 trimesters... And, at least with gastroschisis, it's not like they can do anything before that anyway, even if you know... it's just extra time to be stressed, IMO. I'm 20 weeks now with our first baby after our gastroschisis experience, and not planning to have an ultrasound for at least a couple more weeks.

One thing that I think is important to note is that NEITHER of us had family history or any reason to think there was anything wrong. And that is the case with gastroschisis MOST of the time. AND, even though it is rare, it is getting increasingly more common for no known reason. I volunteer for an organization that provides support to parents having babies with this birth defect, and the most common thing moms have been posting lately is how there are 3 or 4 other babies in the NICUs where their gastroschisis babies are, who have the same thing. When DD was born in 2008, the rate was one in 5000. Now it's one in 2229. As far as birth defects in general, it is one in 33. That's a 3% chance, which is low, but still there (and like I said, it's rising).

Honestly, I think if you're birthing in the hospital, an ultrasound doesn't seem as necessary. But if you're birthing at home, it just feels like a big risk to take, IMO. But that's probably my experience talking...

[erigeron]

Originally Posted by morganlefay 

I also feel fairly content not having one--I'm not convinced they're 100% safe, and often they indicate problems that don't end up as problems.  So, I guess I'm just "letting go" with this one.

I feel the same way and since I often freak out about potential complications of stuff I am glad to have achieved this level of calm.

I also agree with the comment that says ultrasounds may not pose much of a safety risk but on the population level there isn't much of a benefit shown for routine ultrasounds either.

However, hubby feels very strongly that we should have one and so I decided to get one after all... it's his kid too, and I think it's harder for him because he doesn't have the day-to-day connection to it, feeling it move, etc. that I have.

But if it were up to me and he were neutral on it, I'd take a pass.

[Eaglevoice]

Originally Posted by motherbirthlove 

 That's what I hate about these types of procedures... one tends to lead to another.

Exactly why I don't have any ultrasounds.

[Bird Girl]

I know a family who discovered their daughter's neural tube defect on ultrasound. Because they new about it ahead of time, she was delivered by c-section, avoiding damage to the spine, and she has made huge strides (literally) in terms of being able to walk and have very minimal special needs. A vaginal birth would definitely have damaged her nerves much more. So there's one more anecdote in favor of at least one prenatal ultrasound.

For what it's worth, we did have a stressful time during my second pregnancy, when the initial ultrasound revealed a so-called "soft sign" for Down's syndrome. Further tests did not give any indicators of problems, and I went on to have a normal, healthy delivery of my normal (I think!) healthy son. So I do understand the stress that can accompany false positive tests.

It's not anywhere near the stress of finding out that your baby has an actual medical problem, though.