or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › I'm Pregnant › RH- pregnancy & rho-gam: anyone NOT get it/getting it?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

RH- pregnancy & rho-gam: anyone NOT get it/getting it? - Page 2

post #21 of 65
I have the negative factor as well and plan on getting the shot because my midwife says i should at 28wks and postpartum. She said I won't be able to have kids in the future and if I manage to give birth again they would be "horribly deformed". So, I'm getting it done. I don't want to risk my future pregnancies....but I'm confused. I would like to know the pros/cons too.

And is it a MUST that I get it at 28wks???
post #22 of 65
The shot given at 28 weeks is a "just in case" shot. It is given "in case" you have an undetectable microbleed which causes your baby's blood to mix with your own & set up an antibody reaction. If your baby is rh neg you don't need the shot but you don't find out blood type until after the birth so the shot is given regardless. You might also get the shot if you have obvious bleeding before 28 weeks as that might indicate mixing of mother & baby blood & possible sensitization.

As pp have suggested, there are risks either way - with getting the shot prenatally and with not getting the shot prenatally. It's a little more clearcut after birth since you can type the baby and know if they are rh neg or rh +.

There are other countries where the prental shot isn't given unless there is a trauma. It would be interesting to see if their sensitization rates are any higher than here. But I don't know of a resource to find that information.
post #23 of 65
jazzybaby9 - I am Rh-, and I am pretty strongly in favor of Rhogam, but I think your midwife is being inappropriately alarmist, particularly about the 28 week shot.

If you are sensitized to Rh factors, any future pregnancies you have involving Rh positive babies would go badly (risk of fetal brain damage and death), but there is no guarantee that this pregnancy will sensitize you. Even if your partner is Rh positive, the baby might be Rh negative, and if this is the case, there's no need for Rhogam at all.

The 28 week shot is a "just in case" thing, intended to protect you from sensitization in the event that you experience some kind of pregnancy related traumatic injury. Based on the fact that Rhogam shots used to be given after birth, I presume that they could just as effectively give you Rhogam *after* such a trauma if it occurred, although I suppose it's possible that they might miss it in the rush of things surrounding treatment of traumatic injury - the ER docs might not identify you as Rh- or what you have you. Then again, you can buy an ID tag with your name, emergency contact numbers and blood type on it for cheap, EMTs and doctors do look at and for them, and they are absolutely devoid of disease risks.

I am very comfortable with Rhogam. I believe it to be safe. In my case, however, it turned out to be utterly unnecessary - my son is Rh negative. I don't regret having the 28-week shot, but you should be aware that you are probably okay passing it up (barring traumatic injury, in which case, any doctor aware of your Rh status would probably give you another shot of the stuff anyway). If, when your baby is born, he or she turns out to be Rh positive, you can get the shot then. You can even spare your baby the blood typing and get the shot post-partum when there is no chance of risk to the fetus.

Your midwife needs to chill.
post #24 of 65
Although, as I posted earlier, I won't need the shots because my DH, who is most certainly the father of my children , is also Rh-. Both my midwife from the last pg and my OB from this pg are comfortable with that.

If he were Rh+, I would get the shot. I would much rather face the risks myself, as a healthy adult, than subject any future children of mine to the possible complications of me not getting the shot. The risks seem to me to be minimal, and far outweigh the possible risks of not getting it.
post #25 of 65
Jsut to make sure that I understand this correctly. All of the following are assuming that I KNOW that the babe is my husbands

We are both +, there is no need for Rhogam.
I am -, he is +, the baby could potentially be +, potential need for Rhogam.
I am +, he is -, the baby could potentially be +, no need for Rhogam.
We are both -, there is no need for Rhogam.

Is that right, or have I missed something?

Thanks!
post #26 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by earthymama2b View Post
Jsut to make sure that I understand this correctly. All of the following are assuming that I KNOW that the babe is my husbands

We are both +, there is no need for Rhogam.
I am -, he is +, the baby could potentially be +, potential need for Rhogam.
I am +, he is -, the baby could potentially be +, no need for Rhogam.
We are both -, there is no need for Rhogam.

Is that right, or have I missed something?

Thanks!
Both +, both -, you + him - = no rhogam.

You - him + potential need for rhogam.

Yep, you've got it!
post #27 of 65
I got it already b/c my RH is negative and DH's is positive and I had some bleeding in the first trimester. I will have another shot in a couple of months as well.

I trust my midwife and think that in my case, the potential benefit of Rhogam outweighs the risk.
post #28 of 65
Thread Starter 
Your right, CJD is a prion, my mistake. But it still can and is passed through blood. The fact that it is a prion makes it all the more worst. There is no cure and no way to screen. It bascially just eats away at your brain and you die.

Yes I do see that the risk of getting CJD is *probably* smaller then the risk of being sensitzed BUT even if I was sensitzed I could in theory still carry a child to term or near term and with the medical advancments today the baby would have a chance at life (assuming a problem) Is this the route I'd perfer to go? No, but atleast I wouldn't be dieing and the child/children I aready have would still have their mother. These are both extreme examples but Rho-gam and the RH factor are not easy for anyone invloved. Its kinda damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Im entering into the land of a possible rh sensitization. Just kinda wondering other womens experiences with being rh-, partner rh+ and not getting Rho-gam. Maybe I should have titled my post differently?

Either way, thank all you ladies for you quick and honest posts
post #29 of 65
Supermom, I'm sorry if you're not getting exactly what you want to get out of this thread. I wanted to clarify though:

The risk of CJD from Rhogam is *entirely* a hypothetical one. No cases of CJD have ever been linked to Rhogam.
post #30 of 65
I got it during my first pregnancy because I'm O- and my dh is O+. Our dd was also O- so I didn't get one after. Because she is negative I know for sure that my dh carries the gene for Rh-. Therefore I know that our future children have a 50/50 shot of being negative also.

My second pregnancy I m/c and hemmoraged so I had one after.

I think that if I were to have any bleeding episodes during this pregnancy I would accept one prenatally, but if everything goes well I will decline the prenatal one.

If our baby turns out to be + after the birth I will accept it too. I don't think the extra half percent or so of protection the prenatal shot will give is worth either the expense of the shot or the worry about what the consequences could possibly be for a rh- child.
post #31 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperMoM2GTO View Post
Your right, CJD is a prion, my mistake. But it still can and is passed through blood. The fact that it is a prion makes it all the more worst. There is no cure and no way to screen. It bascially just eats away at your brain and you die.

Yes I do see that the risk of getting CJD is *probably* smaller then the risk of being sensitzed BUT even if I was sensitzed I could in theory still carry a child to term or near term and with the medical advancments today the baby would have a chance at life (assuming a problem) Is this the route I'd perfer to go? No, but atleast I wouldn't be dieing and the child/children I aready have would still have their mother. These are both extreme examples but Rho-gam and the RH factor are not easy for anyone invloved. Its kinda damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Im entering into the land of a possible rh sensitization. Just kinda wondering other womens experiences with being rh-, partner rh+ and not getting Rho-gam. Maybe I should have titled my post differently?

Either way, thank all you ladies for you quick and honest posts
Did you see my post above? I wasn't even offered the rhogam after my m/c I don't know if it was because it was just over looked, or what? I had it after my third baby, but not after my fourth, all my kids are positive. I am pregnant with my fifth baby, and had my antiboties tested and they are fine. I am declining to get it prenatally for sure(unless there is some sort of trauma), and most likely not getting it after(again baring any trauma). I think women probably had a lot more trouble when births were much more managed and tramatic(yanking on the cord to get the placenta out, cutting it too early, etc).
post #32 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperMoM2GTO View Post

Yes I do see that the risk of getting CJD is *probably* smaller then the risk of being sensitzed BUT even if I was sensitzed I could in theory still carry a child to term or near term and with the medical advancments today the baby would have a chance at life (assuming a problem)
"Probably" smaller? Seeing how nobody's gotten CJD from Rhogam, and your own statistic about babies dying of Rh disease puts it at 1 in 4000, I'd say that's a VAST difference in risks.

And if blood products scare you, the Rhogam shot is nothing compared to the blood exchanges needed when Rh Disease happens.

Just being honest, because I seriously don't get the paranoia about Rhogam.
post #33 of 65
I'd much rather risk a possible minor localized infection and a hypothetical non-possibility of getting CJD than risking my real health or the health of my babies'.

I have to be monitored when I get rhogam for allergic reactions because I am lacking IgA in my blood which puts me at high risk for anaphylactic reactions to blood products.

Rh sensitivity is a real thing. I am an OB nurse and I have had 2 patients with it in the last year (at a hospital that only has about 100 deliveries a year) who had rh sensitization. That's a lot! The statistics that you are looking at will most likeyly change a lot in the next few years. I'll bet there is going the be an increase in rh sensitization with people refusing to get rhogam when they should.

post #34 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by sugarbeth View Post
And if blood products scare you, the Rhogam shot is nothing compared to the blood exchanges needed when Rh Disease happens.
Playing the Devil's advocate here, what about the very real but rare danger of ABO incompatibilities?

They are rare, but do happen.

Quote:
...I seriously don't get the paranoia about Rhogam.
Having see alot and having friends with livelong, chronic diseases from medical meddling as thyroid cancer from radium boxes applied to the thyroid, routine prenatal X-rays, routine tonsilectomies, DES daughters and sons, routine circumcisions, and other problems that the medical profession is probably responsible for, but has not yet taken culpablity as autism, prematurity, and other chronic diseases, I am paranoid about any routine intervention given to all persons simply because that is the way it is done. I am out of the age group that would worry personally about Rh, but the fact of the matter is that Rh incompatibility is directly linked to early clamping of the umbilical cord during delivery, which leaves part of the baby's blood in the cord to intermingle with the mother's blood. I would simply recommend the more conservative course which would include late clamping, cord sample testing and a rhogam shot if needed within 72 hours.

In other words, one intervention leads to another, and another...

Women have had late miscarriages due to the 28 week shot, but I doubt doctors have shared that information with the mother who suffers the late term miscarriage. The information is given to the doctor. The 28 week shot protects the next baby the mother has, not the one she is carrying.

Quote:
I am an OB nurse and I have had 2 patients with it in the last year (at a hospital that only has about 100 deliveries a year) who had rh sensitization. That's a lot!
Yes, 2% for Rh sensitization is alot. Did they ever receive the Rhogam vaccine? What was their treatment?

Has any one ever asked their doctor about the DU factor?
post #35 of 65
I am A- and Dh is O+. I too was wondering whether or not to get it when pregnant w/my first child. After reading they had removed the mercury/thimerasol I decided to get it at 28 weeks with both dd and ds. They are both + so I also received it after my c/s in the hospitals. This time I am skipping the 28 weeks and will decide about post partum after I know the babies blood type. We don't vaccinate or use medications unless life threatening. We use "natural" approach to healing. I did want to "play it safe" though w/my dd and ds. However, learning more over the last 2 years about health and our bodies and being more laid back in this pregnancy I do not see a need for it during a healthy pregnancy. As far as after birth and if the baby is +, we will discuss/pray about it then. Good luck!
post #36 of 65
You COULD have eaten a tanted piece of meat 20 years ago and already be exposed to the prions too. (assuming you do and have eaten meat since then) Dealing with hypotheticals is no way to argue these types of things. It helps no one and just leads to misinformation running wild!
post #37 of 65
I am rh-, and had rhogam with my first pregnancy at 28 weeks and after delivery when baby was shown to be rh+.

I had rhogam at 28 weeks with preg #2 but not after delivery as baby was found to be rh- as well.

This time, it is our last. We are both being sterilized. I am NOT having rhogam at 28 weeks nor after delivery, because the purpose at this point is to protect future pregnancies. The balance of risk/benefit is therefore shifted. Though, I am also more informed than I was back then, and I might choose to not get rhogam even if I was planning another pregnancy. I haven't looked into it much further because this IS the last.
post #38 of 65
Quote:
Dealing with hypotheticals is no way to argue these types of things.
ITA!

However, that is exactly what doctors do when they pull out their unfounded scare tactics on pregnant women and new mothers. Which is why we all fall prey to such silly arguments.
post #39 of 65
I am also negative (and have had two Rh+ partners) and trying to decide if I should get the Rhogam shot after delivery. I have never gotten it mid-pregnancy and I do not plan to this time either. The midwife I had before did not recommend it for use in the middle of pregnancy. I am not sure what my midwife this time thinks, but she is definately respecting my wishes and choices.

I did have some minor bleeding during this pregnancy, but I did not get it after those episodes.

My first two children were both tested at birth and were Rh- , so I did not receive it after their births.

I am kind of guessing that this one may end up + .....but I am really not sure if I will be getting it or not. I was never sure if I would go ahead and get it after my other children either, but I never had to worry about it because they came out -!

I am reading the book a pp suggested, "Anti D in Midwifery- Panacea or Paradox", by Sara Wickham....I would recommend it (even though I have not gotten all the way through it yet!)

I am very skeptical of the medical world in general and like to do all of my own research on these kinds of things!

I hope that you find all of the info you need! I wish that I could be more help!
post #40 of 65
I am ABneg and do not carry the Du factor. My husband is O+. I declined the 28w shot as I have a history of adverse reactions to vax/immunizations, even though the mechanism for Anti-D is slightly different. I was aware of the risks and if I'd had any obvious trauma to the belly, I'd have gone in for the shot right away. As it was, I felt that an undetected microbleed was far less likely scenario for me, whereas the chances of my having a serious adverse reaction requiring extended use of corticosteroids was fairly high.

The few drops of blood remaining in the cord (which was allowed to pretty much drain into the baby until it was white) were typed. He is B+. I accepted the antenatal shot after verifying that it contained nothing I'm allergic to and was contained in a latex-free delivery system (allergic). I didn't react to it, which was a relief, but I'd much rather risk that reaction when the baby is *outside*.

I'm pretty sure my doctor also ordered bloodwork to see if I'd started producing antibodies--at least I'm sure he told me that. And if I'd become sensitized, I know he'd have called me by now.

My situation may be unique, but isn't everyone's? We all have to do the research and make our own decisions. I was willing to risk my future fertility to ensure that *this* pregnancy went as planned. Not everyone may make the same choice.

ETA: There was a study with results published not long ago . . . something about establishing a method for determining fetal Rh status from fetal DNA in the mother's blood. The results were fairly favorable, so I imagine the test might be available in the future, if not now.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: I'm Pregnant
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › I'm Pregnant › RH- pregnancy & rho-gam: anyone NOT get it/getting it?