or Connect
Mothering › Groups › October 2013 Due Date Club › Discussions › genetic testing

genetic testing - Page 3

post #41 of 66
Originally Posted by superbeans View Post
  I am also sure there are other women out there who do have regrets.

Life is complex and brings with it sticky choices that leave room for second guessing after.  However, I am so glad for Roe v Wade and that women get to be the ultimate decision maker about their reproductive organs.  I have been so defensive about it probably because of recent political attention on the issue in the US (my home country although I don't live there) and so many conservative movements and politicians pursuing overturning Roe v Wade & otherwise restricting a woman's control over her body (access to birth control, etc).   Even if there are some women who regret their decisions after the fact, I still want that decision to be in the woman's own hands, as it seems you all do as well (seems even those of you who would never abort for any reason are not anti choice in terms of their political stance but perhaps there are those lurking this thread who feel that way, I don't know).

post #42 of 66
Thread Starter 
Wow this took off!
I took my employee out for lunch today as her cvs came back negative. Its been the topic of the week. Even the negative for genetic issues don't explain the 6mm nt. So its "half okay". When you get to 40 there's a lot of pressure. We have been offered genetic counselling at every appointment. The pressure to make a decision if results of screenings come back iffy is huge. I am prolife for me and prochoice for everyone else. Well prochoice for me too! I want my choice to be respected and I don't feel it is. (Which is odd as my ob refuses to do terminations...but will offer cvs and amnio)

like this paper


It was interesting.

We already have designer ivf babies where embryos are prescreened for genetic issues. I don't have an issue with that, if you can't concieve naturally you need the best eggs they get.
post #43 of 66
Originally Posted by Serafina33 View Post

But she could have an abortion?  That's a bit interesting way to follow Catholic doctrine.

Eh, I think it's a pretty typical way to follow Catholic doctrine. To outsiders it might seem hypocritical, but I think the Catholic church (and they probably aren't alone in this among religions) lends itself to picking and choosing, particularly in the US. I've got a lot of Catholics in my family and town. Anecdotally, there are those who oppose abortion but support the death penalty, those who oppose divorce but support same-sex marriage, etc. I actually don't know any Catholics now that I think of it who don't break at least some rules but follow others. Wouldn't work for me, but seems to work for them.
post #44 of 66
Originally Posted by Shiloh View Post
We already have designer ivf babies where embryos are prescreened for genetic issues. I don't have an issue with that, if you can't concieve naturally you need the best eggs they get.

That's different than choosing eye color and height and intellectual traits, etc.....   The articles: http://www.howstuffworks.com/life/genetic/designer-children.htm  and http://www.howstuffworks.com/life/human-biology/future-children.htm are the basis of the half hour podcast I listened to.  Definitely a can of worms that makes me really uncomfortable.  Then again nano computers in our bloodstream and humanity blending with technology and technology gaining awareness is apparently not supposed to be far away either:  http://www.howstuffworks.com/gadgets/high-tech-gadgets/technological-singularity.htm  and that stuff totally blows my mind and creeps me out.  shrug.gif

post #45 of 66
Thread Starter 
But who decides what we weed out? I don't get to choose the sperm and egg, I get one egg a month and let the sperm fight it out wink1.gif

Maybe I'm more sensitive as I'm not the embryo anyone would pick I have two major birth defects (kidneys and liver), I have spells and asthma....one day will people like me be weeded out?

Its so Gattica.

But morally none of us are black and white. I am prolife but I've used abortifacient methods of bc and the morning after pill and like the death penalty. I don't judge, I don't want a mother having a child she feels would be too much for her or her family. But I feel judged for not being in that 90% but also this is my 6th plus 3 step kids. I think we can handle different, I might feel different if I was 40 having my 1st. We also have money, age, education, family, stability and healthcare. Our relationship wouldn't be obliterated by a ds kid. Not all partners or families would be accepting.
post #46 of 66
My friend Sarah's son was diagnosed with spina bifida in-utero, and she was pressures to abort him. She was told that he had no cerebellum, that he would be permanently paralyzed, and it would be better for him if she killed him because he would have no quality of life. Thank God, she refused and today her son is doing amazingly well. She wrote a post about her experiences earlier today: http://wifeytini.blogspot.com/2013/05/what-to-expect-when-you-totally-werent.htm

I'm a Catholic, and I believe wholeheartedly in everything the Church teaches. I don't pick and choose which doctrines apply to me and which don't. It's all or nothing. Any Catholic who believes otherwise doesn't truly understand what it means to be a follower of Christ. I personally don't understand why anybody would want to be a member of a church that they believe teaches error as doctrine in any respect.

I am wholeheartedly in favor of letting women decide what to do with their bodies. However, a baby has a separate, distinct, genetically unique body of his or her own from the moment of his or her conception, and I don't believe a woman (or anyone) should have the "right" to choose to kill an innocent human being, no matter the circumstances.

I especially find it appalling that that anyone would choose to kill a baby just because that baby is not perfect. My baby has bilateral club feet, something that would not have shown up in early testing and was only diagnosed at our 20 week ultrasound. I've been told that some people actually do choose to kill their baby after a diagnosis of club feet - a condition that is 100% curable. That boggles my mind. My child may not be "perfect" but s/he is a valuable human being with intrinsic worth and dignity, and that worth and dignity is independent of his/her physical health or degree of "wantedness."
post #47 of 66
I think we are really treading some dangerous ground with this thread and I wish I didn't have to see this in our DDC. Ugh!!!
post #48 of 66

Ahhh, there are women in this group who would like to see abortion illegal in the US.   Just this year a catholic hospital in a Ireland, a catholic country, used their blanket ban on abortions as reason to watch an Indian woman die a preventable death:



Ms. Savita Halappanavar, 31, died from “medical misadventure” involving the failure of the hospital’s staff to identify, document or address her development of blood poisoning. Ms. Halappanavar’s husband, Praveen, said the hospital staff refused to give his wife an abortion even though her fetus had no chance of survival, citing the country’s Roman Catholic social policies against abortions.  The staff waited three days until the 17-week-old fetus had died. By then Ms. Halappanavar was in an advanced state of septicemia, and she died four days later.

The six-man, five-woman jury ruled that Ms. Halappanavar, who was a dentist, died from “medical misadventure,” meaning incompetence in her care.

This is what happens when we don't let women be in charge of the serious decision regarding ending a pregnancy.  It's a slippery slope once you start taking control away from the woman in question, and in practice, some women will die.  This woman begged the hospital for an abortion and other measures to get her out of excruciating pain for days while she was in agony and they stood back and insisted to let nature run its course during her miscarriage, even though the fetus was already determined to have no chance of survival.  But saving the mother didn't register as a priority, only not wanting to have any hand, any involvement in the death of a 17 week fetus.  At least the Irish court found the hospital guilty, which must be some consolation to her widower.  
post #49 of 66
Thread Starter 
Maybe there are people who would take away the right to choose but that's why a democracy is a good thing. My intent wasn't to get into a termination/feticide debate but to discuss the actual merits, agenda of screening and the pressure not support I felt. I was looking for the best medical decisions for my pregnancy like why the anomaly scan is offered at 18 weeks wouldn't 24 be best? Because I find this:

Provide appropriate information for women so that they can make an informed choice;
Offer choices to women about their screening options and pregnancy management;
Identify serious fetal abnormalities, either incompatible with life or associated with morbidity, allowing women to make reproductive choices;

This is acceptable for women who are prochoice for themselves. But for what kind of care I want I've already made my "informed reproductive choice" and I question hoe informed we are about testing, its actual accuracy, injury rates, miscarriage rates when I see published reports in medical journals that say needle injuries from amnio are about 6-7% and miscarriage 1-2% and my dr throws around 1 in 1600. Where's the truth?

I don't think its out of place in a ddc to discuss relevant pregnancy issues.
post #50 of 66
Thread Starter 
My friend who works in the biz said a scan atleast of 22 weeks is best because everything is formed and can be visualised 18 can be too early so it left me thinking why 18. Its because it needs to be earlier in time for more scans and testing and termination before that 22 or 24 week cut off. So I resent that terminations are dictating my course of care I want the best us not 2!

Mind you I'm still a nut who gets upset we aren't warned about nonionizing radiation by our physicians and us are tossed out like halloween candy when medical literature says they're not healthy.
post #51 of 66
Originally Posted by dalia View Post

I think we are really treading some dangerous ground with this thread and I wish I didn't have to see this in our DDC. Ugh!!!
Hugs. I agree this is a painful and messy topic. I know it doesn't solve the problem of seeing it on the DDC, but I for one am going to unsubscribe now that I've sad my piece. It is no longer healthy for me to read updates.
Originally Posted by joanna47 View Post

I'm a Catholic, and I believe wholeheartedly in everything the Church teaches.
And that's my cue to leave the room... Read my signature and you'll know why!
post #52 of 66
Originally Posted by dalia View Post

I think we are really treading some dangerous ground with this thread and I wish I didn't have to see this in our DDC. Ugh!!!
That's what I was trying to say as well, before I was essentially shoved aside. shrug.gif

This DDC has been one of the more quiet ones, and threads like this don't help us to get closer and bond as a group. This is probably why MDC is very hesitant to host abortion discussions at all, though in a DDC anything goes.
post #53 of 66
Thread Starter 
I didn't mean to start a discussion on abortion but the merits and politics of prenatal testing and screening. I've been on mothering a long time, its supposed to be about supporting our individual choices. I was looking for support on how I felt railroaded by these political not personal decisions. Mothers that would term welcome this screening but I feel not respected for my personal beliefs and choices respected because I'm not a 90%'er and I needed help advocating for what's best for my baby in this culture of screening and weeding out. I see this environment of pushing tests on my friends adding unnecessary anxiety to pregnancies. If a mother chooses it great, but my friend with the cvs chose NOT to screen she's a pastors wife. She had a cervix check because she needed a cerlage - they measured the nt against her wishes and then railroaded her into a cvs even though she's prolife with "its safe" and you'd want to be prepared. The reality is they aren't "safe" would you get in a car knowing there's a 2% chance you'd die? Or a 10% chance of injury? No way but the risks are downplayed like we as women would make different decisions if we knew and the medical establishment "knows better" and glosses over real risks. This is as relevant as vbacs etc.
Edited by Shiloh - 5/22/13 at 6:06am
post #54 of 66
Oh Shiloh, I don't think you started a conversation about abortion... it just sorta ended up going that way. hug.gif

I certainly don't think anyone should be pressured to test when they don't want to. I'm sure it varies by practice... just as some are more natural-friendly in birthing choices, so are they in screening options. Down here I haven't heard of anyone I know personally being pressured into a test they didn't want.
post #55 of 66
Thread Starter 
I thought so too! One of my bff is my mw. She did zero tests, screens, us, dopplers for her pregnancies yet if you've followed my trip through anxiety land as a loss mama I've had that doppler shoved on me even when I stated I didn't want it.

And I'm no shrinking violet!
So I figured I'm doing something wrong.
I feel for all the vbac mamas its not easy to be heard!
post #56 of 66
Originally Posted by Mosaic View Post
  Down here I haven't heard of anyone I know personally being pressured into a test they didn't want.

Nor here would anyone be pressured into anything.  Everything is optional, but if you refused to let them take your weight, blood pressure, and test the urine at each monthly visit they might start to act funny.  For example, I live in a city where the annual number of planned homebirths is 1. The general culture here thinks of it as an insane, risky, 19th century idea and no one knows anyone who has ever done it.    And when I announced my plans at the antenatal clinic, they were surprised for two seconds and then all gung-ho in favor of my being such an outlier.


I think if you are receiving care that pressures you into anything you aren't comfortable with, then walk out and find prenatal care you feel respects your agenda.

post #57 of 66
Serafina - I wish care like that was more accessible. There are only two legal midwife practices that come to my area. I picked the most liberal, but there's still a LOT of pressure for gestational diabetes testing and she straight up won't attend a breech birth (nor will her back-up ob). I wish I had more options, but I don't.
post #58 of 66

I trust that you've looked into all reasonable options, and I feel for your situation.  hug2.gif  Hopefully you can make it somehow work out anyways.

I'm actually not bathing in great midwife opportunities either and am hiring a private midwife to travel several hours to attend my homebirth, there are none (not one) within a couple hundred mile radius of here who do homebirths.  I actually only know of one in the entire country I live in, whom I hired last time and will use for all future births (he's so good).

post #59 of 66

Serafina, perhaps you aren't aware, but the inquest found that Savita died due to medical misadventure (i.e., malpractice), not due to being denied an abortion. It was actually determined that an abortion would not have saved her life anyway because the infection had already set in by that point. Funny how that side of the story was not trumpeted by the media, eh?


Also, direct abortion is never necessary to save the life of the mother.


I really encourage you to do additional research in this regard.

post #60 of 66
Originally Posted by Sphinxy View Post

And that's my cue to leave the room... Read my signature and you'll know why!


Wow, that's a really offensive stereotype. I think all human beings have inherent worth and dignity regardless of their sexual preferences. But thanks for assuming I'm a bigot. That's very open-minded and tolerant of you. eyesroll.gif

Mothering › Groups › October 2013 Due Date Club › Discussions › genetic testing