I will be 23 weeks when I have the scan - the OB office prefers to do the scans a bit later - the structures and baby in general are larger, easier to see, and therefore easier to see if there are any abnormalities. With both my prior pregnancies, the 20 week scan turned into 2 to 3 additional scans because the baby wasn't positioned well, or the structures like heart and brain were hard to get clear pictures of. Much as I hate the delay (I want to KNOW!), I totally agree with the logic.
Are you getting a 20 week U/S? - Page 4
Thanks! Still no final decision, but we are running out of time. My intuition is saying there is no reason to do it now. I just need to call my midwife and make sure she fine with us not doing one. I am pretty sure she is, but just to me sure.
Turns out we were able to have an anatomy scan after all.
I found an ultrasound school that does them for $50. We went yesterday, I am 18 weeks and change.
It was nice to see the baby and also have DD and DH see the baby as well. DD was so funny during the scan.
I kept laughing at her and shaking the ultrasound wand.
Our baby boy is healthy and growing strong :)
At my doc appointment today (I'm 16 weeks), we discussed my concerns about the 20 week ultrasound - firstly the dubious safety of the technology itself, and secondly the rate of false positives I've seen my friends suffer through only to have healthy babies finally. Of course she's urging me to have the 20 week ultrasound, but is willing to be open to the fact we might decide not to go for it. She gave me all the reasons we should do it, and strongly recommended it, but left the decision upto us.
I offered to have a quick scan just to reassure her on the pregnancy related parameters - placental placement, cervical length and confirming it is not twins. She didn't seem to be much concerned about those factors though, especially since my first pregnancy with DS was complication-free. Those of you who are choosing not to scan - how do you rule out twins without a scan?
Still definitely leaning towards not scanning, have more than a month to decide.
False positives I think also have a great deal to do with the skill of the technician and the sensitivity of the equipment. IDK what your office has or uses, but that is something to keep into consideration. The OB office I go to has very skilled techs and the technology they have is quite good, and I trust, as much as can be, the results they'd give me.
My prior OB office the tech and the equipment were not as good, and I didn't trust the results given (neither did the doc -they ended up sending us to an outside facility to verify everything)
Twins I think you could at least have a good hunch at by late in pregnancy, given size, belly mapping, and scanning over the belly with a doppler or fetascope looking for different heartbeats. Is that a strong concern of yours?
Yeah, I've never had an ultrasound during pregnancy (this is my second baby). It's so interesting how different care providers do or don't stress them. My midwives (I'm seeing a different caregiver this time around) have never considered scans to be a high priority for a healthy woman in a normal pregnancy. This was something that I spoke to midwives about during the interview stage, and with both pregnancies I've sought out midwives who lean more towards informed parental decision making (and away from required testing).
I think it would be pretty difficult to miss a second baby in there, so long as the medical provider is skilled at palpating the pregnant belly to feel for placement of arms, legs, head, torso and bottom of the baby/babies! Weight gain and fast growth are also going to be clues that there may be more than one baby. You may find out a bit later on than you would if you had early scans, but I do believe that you'd most always find out.
Thanks for your input akind, and no, twins is not really a strong concern for me - just wondered if there was any factor that would make a scan indispensable. It appears not :) I agree with you LightForest, that a routine scan is not a high priority for a healthy woman in a normal pregnancy. IMO as a diagnostic tool to follow up a concern from a clinical exam, or certain symptoms, ultrasound could be valuable, but not as routine screening for every pregnancy.
Hi, there. My midwife talked me into getting a 20 week ultrasound at my last appointment (16 weeks). We weren't planning to do it because I'm not high risk and my insurance doesn't cover it because I'm not yet 35. My midwife said that even if our quad screen came back with good results, the ultrasound could reveal birth defects unrelated to a genetic disorder, and that those birth defects might determine where we would like to have the baby. We were planning on having our baby in a hospital anyway, but if we were to discover, for example that the baby had a heart defect, we would want to birth at the large children's hospital in our state's capital. Also, the ultrasound would show if I had a placenta previa, which would dictate a c-section. At my son's 20-week ultrasound, I did indeed have a partial previa. Ultimately, this resolved itself, but I would like to make sure, since I know that it happened once, that it doesn't happen again.
Just my two cents about my recent change in decision. Hope this is helpful.
So, I made the ultrasound appointment, then canceled. I am happy with the decision. I will go later if my midwife sees any red flags. I felt so much better after making the decision not to do it. It brought up a lot of anxiety for me after my experience in my last pregnancy after having one. Then I watched Ina May on the first episode of More Business of Being Born last night and feel even more at ease about it. I love Ina May!
Good for you, Sarah! Not so much for not getting an u/s, per se, but for going with what would make you feel less anxious, all else being equal. (I know in my case, given my specific circumstances, all else-- in terms of actual morbidity/mortality risk-- really was equal.) I made the exact same decision for the exact same reasons and am very, very happy about it. As I've said before, neither choice would come with zero worry for me, but I felt much better about not getting an u/s than getting one. Of course, if you made the opposite choice based on the same factors (or if the risk were much higher for one choice than the other, and you chose the lower-risk course), I'd be just as supportive-- honestly! Good for you!