Can I take a poll on ultrasounds and early delivery?? Mini study- Twin mamas please read!! - Mothering Forums
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 29 Old 06-15-2012, 06:02 PM - Thread Starter
 
Gindugirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: NYC/Los Angeles
Posts: 19
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I read somewhere (but it's vague) that too many ultrasounds can increase the chances of delivering early.  So now I'm curious and would like to do my own mini study with the women here.

 

So reply and put how often you were scanned in your twin pregnancy, whether it was mono-di or di-di and then what week you went into labor.

 

I'm super curious.  I am almost 32 weeks with  mono-di twins and I get scanned every 2 weeks and I'm about to move to weekly NST's.  It just seems like soooo much.  But I know I'm "high risk."  I would love other mama's opinions on all this.

 

Thanks!!


Me-38

DH-46

DD-Born 7/19/09 Natural,unmedicated hospital hypno birth! energy.gif

Pregnant with Mono-di twin boys, due some time in mid to late July 2012!babyboy.gifbabyboy.gif

Gindugirl is offline  
#2 of 29 Old 06-15-2012, 06:08 PM
 
pammysue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Mountains of S. California
Posts: 1,541
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

lurk.gif

 

Subbing so I can come back after delivery...I'm interested in others responses too.


Pamstillheart.gif Cliffguitar.gif Malachi 5/08 bouncy.gif   Judah 5/10 jog.gif  Eden 8/12 babygirl.gif Asher 8/12 babyboy.gif

 
 You can't get a cup of tea big enough or a book long enough to suit me. ~CS Lewis

pammysue is offline  
#3 of 29 Old 06-16-2012, 08:28 AM
 
Emelee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Couch or rocker.
Posts: 150
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Di-Di twins.

 

Early ultrasound at 9 weeks when we discovered twins

15 weeks to determine sac and placenta placement

20 weeks for suspected bleeding

22 weeks for anatomy scan

34 weeks

36 weeks

2x at 40 weeks for BFP

 

so total I had 8 ultrasounds and I went to 41 weeks 1 day. I was more concerned when they would bang on my uterus to get the girls to move positions than I was about the risk of what the ultrasound would do to them. Good luck to you!


Emelee married to J in 03/07. 12/10 our DD C was at 41.3 weeks, and 06/12 our fraternal DDs A and V were hospital birth at 41.1 weeks.
Emelee is online now  
#4 of 29 Old 06-17-2012, 05:03 AM
 
Emaya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Sweden
Posts: 238
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

First ultrasound at week 19 or 20 (thought it was a normal pregnancy until then and Swedes do only one routine ultrasound around week 19 in normal pregnancies). After that, every two weeks. Had a planned c-section at 36 weeks (with triplets, they wouldn't let them go longer). 

 

I imagine more ultrasounds can lead to earlier birth -- but I suspect it's earlier c-section or induction rather than an initiation of natural labor. Having doctors poke around usually leads to more medical intervention (necessary or otherwise) as they find things that look worrisome or suspicious - things that might actually have resolved themselves without an ultrasound (or early induction). But that's just my guess.


(35) Teacher, mother to DD '08 + triplets (identical boys and a girl) born at 36 weeks gestation in ´11.  Passions: gardening, cooking, painting, fishing, wild food gathering, reading, kayaking and more.

Emaya is offline  
#5 of 29 Old 06-17-2012, 08:45 PM
 
lesliesara63's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ontario
Posts: 1,200
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I had tons of u/s 7weeks -twins 9 weeks-triplets!! 10 & 12weeks quick in office u/s 14 & 18weeks full u/s & every two weeks after than 28-32 weeks u/s 2x/week


Leslie, mama to Paige 8, Zara 3 and Audrey, Sophia & Nina June 7/11 @32.6
angel1.gifOct/01angel1.gif July/10angel1.gif Sept/10

lesliesara63 is offline  
#6 of 29 Old 06-18-2012, 05:48 AM
 
Red Pajama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: climbing a mountain of laundry
Posts: 1,348
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

My twins were found early, and I was referred fairly quickly to a maternal-fetal medicine specialist. So I had my usual appointments with my OB, and then additional appointments with the MFM doctors. Point being, growth ultrasounds and non-stress tests fairly frequently.

My twins are fraternal.  Delivery was at 38 weeks, but that was a scheduled c-section. I suspect labor was still at least a week off.


Twin boys (2/05) and little sister (10/07)
Red Pajama is offline  
#7 of 29 Old 06-18-2012, 07:23 AM
 
nd_deadhead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,138
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)

My boys were mono-di; I had my first US at 10 weeks; the last the day I delivered (at 39 weeks), with 8 other in between.

 

I ended up having a C-section because I developed HELLP syndrome; I highly doubt the ultrasounds had anything to do with it. I'm 5'4", carrying 16 pounds of baby (plus placenta, amniotic fluid, etc). My poor little body just couldn't take it any more.

 

As for later effects - my sons just graduated from high school with honors; they are bright, funny, wonderful, healthy young men.


If the chips are down, the buffalo is empty.

nd_deadhead is offline  
#8 of 29 Old 06-18-2012, 11:08 AM
 
mally's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 4
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

My boys were mono-di. I had my first ultrasound at 19 weeks, then every 2 weeks, then every week, until they were born at 37 weeks. I believe I had 12 altogether. Hope that helps!

mally is offline  
#9 of 29 Old 06-18-2012, 01:10 PM
 
mylilmonkeys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 932
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

My girls were confirmed at 19 weeks.  I'm not a fan of ultrasounds, and even refuse the doppler for heart tones in a singleton pregnancy.  With the twins, if we couldn't get both heartbeats, I would consent to doppler.  I consented to a second scan for growth and a third scan for position.  We chose to induce at 38 weeks by ROM because of my history and location; I preferred to have my twin birth assisted, and otherwise would have had a significant risk of labor and birth with only my other children for attendants. LOL  All my midwives are over an hour away and even my husband M-F from 6am-10pm.  Otherwise, my induction had nothing to do with ultrasounds and my girls were good sized at 7,12/18 inches and 6,8/19inches. 


Mom to eight!!  Our twin girls arrived 3-3-2011.

mylilmonkeys is offline  
#10 of 29 Old 06-19-2012, 10:29 AM
 
momtoafireteam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 758
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I had eleventy billion ultrasounds with my twin pregnancy. They were born at 35 weeks at 6lbs each and came home with me 3 days later. 

 

With this current triplet pregnancy again I am having lots of scans. For ME, there is absolutely no way I wouldn't. JMO. 


Mama to nine gorgeous babies, with finale #10 due April'14.
momtoafireteam is offline  
#11 of 29 Old 06-19-2012, 10:31 AM
 
mamalovex3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 261
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

My first twin pregnancy was mono-di, we had our first u/s at 14 weeks, another at 16 weeks to check placentas, another at 18 weeks for anatomy, then at 20 weeks to recheck some measurements.  At 24 weeks I had a shortened cervix, so had biweekly ultrasounds from there to monitor growth and check my cervical length.  Went into labour at 38w2d, so....12 in all?

 

With my second twin pregnancy (currently in progress!), we had an early u/s at 8 weeks to make sure there was only one baby (HA!), another at 10 weeks to check placentas and chorionicity, then at 19 weeks for anatomy, again at 21 to recheck some measurements, then at 26 weeks, where I had a shortened cervix again, so I'll be heading back every 2 weeks to keep an eye on that and to check out growth as well.

 

I think the issue that more ultrasounds can lead to earlier delivery is because doctors always seem to think that at the first sign of anything even possibly off, the babies will be better off out than in.  So they pressure you to induce or have a c-section.  I would really do my research and make the doctors justify everything they want to do, especially when it comes to having the babies earlier than full term. 


Married to my love love.gif since 08/12/10, mama to E REPlaySkateboard04HL.gif04/06/01 and twin girls M and Z slingtwin.gif 01/08/11

 We are a  slingtwin.gif  familybed2.gif cd.gif   nursex2.gif family!  Expecting #4 and #5 in September - what a surprise!

mamalovex3 is offline  
#12 of 29 Old 06-19-2012, 09:33 PM
 
gozal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 563
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Interesting question! No data points to share but I imagine you'd find a correlation, since ultrasounds generally correspond to a whole host of monitoring/medical care. The more data, the more decisions, basically. As far as causation...I would imagine it's multifactorial. Okay, reading along. :)


Me + DH + DS ('07) + after a long and bumpy road, thrilled that our twin boys are finally here (DS2 & DS3, '12)

gozal is offline  
#13 of 29 Old 06-21-2012, 07:06 PM - Thread Starter
 
Gindugirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: NYC/Los Angeles
Posts: 19
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Thanks ladies.  I just find this subject fascinating.  I agree, the correlation would more likely come from the fact that the extra sonograms would lead to more worry and possibly earlier inductions.   I have come to terms with my every 2 week u/s and now weekly NST's and then Bi-weekly NST's at 34 weeks!  It's just so much.  I'm doing it b/c of course I'm buying into the worry that if I don't I could miss something.  So the the risk or inconvenience of the scans doesn't seem to outweigh the risk if something serious is missed.  But every time I'm these appts.  I just feel like it's total overkill and I get very irritated.  I'm trying to negotiate these two sides of myself.  Having a mono-di pregnancy has forced me to make MANY compromises, which I'm doing to a point.  But I am constantly researching, to make sure I'm giving myself the best chance to have a go at it my way.  


Me-38

DH-46

DD-Born 7/19/09 Natural,unmedicated hospital hypno birth! energy.gif

Pregnant with Mono-di twin boys, due some time in mid to late July 2012!babyboy.gifbabyboy.gif

Gindugirl is offline  
#14 of 29 Old 06-22-2012, 06:45 AM
 
fragola3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Southern AZ
Posts: 13
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

My di-di mz girls were born at 40 weeks 1 day.  My first sono was at about 20 weeks (Tech said, "How many babies are you having, b/c there's 2!"  We were shocked.)  Then I had about a sono at every appointment--one a month until I went to bi-weekly during the last 2 months and weekly during the last month.

 

I think we in the U.S. do too many ultrasounds--especially for routine singleton pregnancies.  I'm surprised at how many sonos my friends get at their OBs...it seems like standard protocol now, which I think is unnecessary.

 

I guess w/ my twins I could have refused them, but I felt a little extra nervous carrying twins.  I tried my best not to go the typical medical route, but constantly felt conflicted about how to do that w/ twins (our local birth center wouldn't care for me once we discovered I was carrying twins, and I didn't want to go with a home birth....).


Mama to my sweet sea-blue-eyed girl (2/06) and my hilarious mz dd twins (1/09) who keep me running.
fragola3 is offline  
#15 of 29 Old 06-23-2012, 12:30 PM
 
~bookcase~'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: In the middle of sweet chaos.
Posts: 1,226
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I declined a whole pile of scans for my di di twins (had 3 and was due for a 4th at 36 weeks I think) and gave birth spontaneously at 32 weeks.

I've heard many scans linked to IUGR but not early birth.
 


joy.gifspread a lot of love joy.gif

~bookcase~ is offline  
#16 of 29 Old 06-26-2012, 08:32 AM
 
Jess Sabo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I have fraternal girls, born at home at 38 weeks.  Went into labor spontaneously.  Only one sonogram at 7 months, and tried to avoid doppler (used it a handful of times, and during labor).  Didn't feel I was high risk: my midwife had me eat 120 g of protein a day, get extra rest, and drink NORA tea in my last trimester.  Pregnancy was really challenging and painful because I was so huge, but I don't think twin mommas deserve to be called high risk unless they develop health issues, just like anyone else.  Just my thought . . .

 

Cool survey- love and best wishes for you and your babes!
 

Jess Sabo is offline  
#17 of 29 Old 06-26-2012, 08:46 AM
 
VocalMinority's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: surrounded by testosterone
Posts: 1,292
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I had only one ultrasound before my water broke (leaked is a better term), but many (I think it was one a day) during the six days between the leak and the actual birth.  My twins were born at 24 weeks.  Like most twins, mine were in separate sacs, but I simply don't know whether they shared a placenta.  (With 24-weekers, that question was the last thing on my mind.)  I'm curious to know what you conclude, but I never associated their early birth with the ultrasound.  There were several other risk factors.  But this is an interesting question.


One woman in a house full of men:  my soul mate:  partners.gif  orfencing.gif... twin sons:lurk.giflurk.gif(HS juniors) ... step-son: guitar.gif (a freshman) ... our little man: kid.gif  (a kindergartener) ... and there is another female in the house, after all:  ourdog2.gif. 
VocalMinority is offline  
#18 of 29 Old 06-27-2012, 01:24 PM
 
newmommy7-08's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 405
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I had an u/s at 7 wks, one at 9 wks, and then every 4 wks starting at 16 wks. Actually I had them every 2 weeks after 28 wks and then weekly after 32 weeks because my mw had a really rough time finding heartbeats on the doppler because they were right next to one another so she'd just do a quickie u/s so that we could "see" which heartbeat we were hearing. Then I had a scheduled c/s at 39w3d for breech baby A
 


Wife (32) to DH (33) Mom to DS 2 and Twin DD's born 8/11
newmommy7-08 is offline  
#19 of 29 Old 06-29-2012, 08:25 AM
 
~adorkable~'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: State Of Bliss
Posts: 4,495
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

i think there is simply too many variables, known and unknown to ever get a clear picture on this, though it is a interesting question.  singe the sample size is so small (even with all twins not just the ones here) and because twin pregnancies are each so unique in there physical layout, one would never know unless it was glaring.


partners.gif 2twins.gif  So what if I don't fit cleanly into a defined parenting style, my kids don't fit into a personality archetype either!

 
~adorkable~ is offline  
#20 of 29 Old 07-03-2012, 02:04 PM
 
EonJourney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Up North
Posts: 118
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Mono Di and had TTTS so had ultrasounds 2-3 x week starting at 19 weeks. No signs of labor. C Sect at 36.5 weeks...I was hiking  3hrs up mtns @ 36 weeks...My boys are 8 months very mellow and super happy babies.


42 year old runnerjog.gif, hiker. Mom to DS(6/28/08) smile.gifand married to my best friend. Cloth diaper and plan to homeschool. Love my life in the mountains. Identical twin boys born 11/3/11 selectivevax.gifgoorganic.jpgbfolderchild.gifnocirc.giffambedsingle2.gif

EonJourney is offline  
#21 of 29 Old 07-06-2012, 10:19 AM
 
erigeron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,345
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

not a MOM but it seems to me that pregnancies with more problems might lead to BOTH lots of scans and the need for early delivery. nak.


WOHM to a girl jog.gif (6-11) and a new baby boy stork-boy.gif (2-14) and adjusting to the full-time life and husband being a SAHD. 
erigeron is offline  
#22 of 29 Old 07-06-2012, 06:57 PM
 
DoubleDouble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 346
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

That's what I thought, too - cause & consequence confusion. Anyway, my two cents - ultrasounds every two weeks since week 5, every week from week 34, three times on week 37, if I remember correctly, was not in labor before cesarean at week 38.

DoubleDouble is offline  
#23 of 29 Old 07-18-2012, 08:00 AM - Thread Starter
 
Gindugirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: NYC/Los Angeles
Posts: 19
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I'm now 36.2 weeks pregnant and except for some contractions, I don't see labor in sight yet.  I agree this is too small of a group and too many variables to gauge whether u/s make a difference in gestation.  I just hope a larger study is done at some point.


Me-38

DH-46

DD-Born 7/19/09 Natural,unmedicated hospital hypno birth! energy.gif

Pregnant with Mono-di twin boys, due some time in mid to late July 2012!babyboy.gifbabyboy.gif

Gindugirl is offline  
#24 of 29 Old 11-23-2012, 02:19 PM
 
Kokoes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

There is a list at the end of this post with articles that state the possible dangers of too many ultrasounds. Of course, one should also consider the dangers of not having the right amount of u/s when needed (e.g a twin pregnancy with risk of TTTS). So, I guess it is a matter of weighing the pros and cons for each single case...

Kokoes is offline  
#25 of 29 Old 11-23-2012, 04:45 PM
 
baileyandmikey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: NY
Posts: 3,068
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Well, I haven't delivered yet, but my first u/s was at 8 weeks, then every 2 weeks since!  Eeek!


Kristin- Wife to J, Mommy to B (11), M-S (8), and little J (4) and J&J (7 months)
baileyandmikey is offline  
#26 of 29 Old 11-24-2012, 03:28 PM
 
Adaline'sMama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 4,792
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I'm subbing here for after delivery. Here is my U/S schedule:

 

7.5 weeks just to make sure everything was ok (after a loss)

10 weeks for viability

13 weeks for nuchal scan

18 weeks for anatomy scan/gender assessment 

22 weeks to check for discordant growth

25 weeks to check for discordant growth 

28 weeks to check for discordant growth/ cervical shortening 

~this is where we are now, but these are scheduled~

32 weeks to check for discordant growth/cervical shortening

36 weeks to check amniotic fluid levels

38 weeks at induction. Also, in the event of natural delivery (likely) there will be an ultrasound machine in the room. 

 

We'll see when I deliver. 10 ultrasounds, one of them was super long (the nuchal scan at 13 weeks took for.f-ing.ever. 


Holly and David partners.gif

Adaline love.gif (3/20/10), and Charlie brokenheart.gif (1/26/12- 4/10/12) and our identical  rainbow1284.gif  twins Callie and Wendy (01/04/13)

SIDS happens. 

Adaline'sMama is offline  
#27 of 29 Old 11-26-2012, 05:50 PM
 
SympatheticDad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 38
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

That "anthrodoula" blog post is the most shameful sort of deceptive fearmongering.  How the author can sleep at night after telling such horrible lies to worried mommas is beyond me.

 

Specific lies that leapt off the page at me were her description of sonography as involving "radiation from ultrasound", which is clearly deceptive (as the National Institutes of Health say, "Ultrasound does not involve radiation, such as that used when taking an x-ray.")  One could describe sound as "radiation", but that's sort of like describing water as a "toxin".  Also, I love how she says that left-handed people are brain-damaged.  What a genius.

 

The best and most recent clinical article I could find on sonography is here:  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2788813/.  The Too Long Didn't Read version is:  ultrasound has a safety record of going back 50 years.  There are (as with any medical procedure) some risks and unknowns, which is why the FDA recommends against the use of ultrasound in non-diagnostic situations, but there are no independently replicated epidemiologic data exist to suggest harmful effects of ultrasonography in the fetus.  There are some interesting questions about the long-term effects of ultrasounds on mice who are exposed to extended periods of strong waves (30 minutes or more); those are interesting areas for future research but certainly shouldn't be discouraging the use of ultrasound as a diagnostic tool.

 

The reality is that if you are in a high-risk category for your pregnancy (and carrying multiples generally qualifies as such, if only because of the risk of IUGR), the benefits of ultrasound far outweigh the risks, no matter how you slice it.

 

On a purely anecdotal note, my little ones were sonogrammed probably a hundred times.  They seem no worse for wear.  And, for the record, they're not left-handed.

SympatheticDad is offline  
#28 of 29 Old 11-26-2012, 08:31 PM
 
eminvc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 99
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kokoes View Post

There is a list at the end of this post with articles that state the possible dangers of too many ultrasounds. Of course, one should also consider the dangers of not having the right amount of u/s when needed (e.g a twin pregnancy with risk of TTTS). So, I guess it is a matter of weighing the pros and cons for each single case...


I find it disturbing that the references in this post are most recently from 1998. Technology has changed in 14 years, and I think this is a little too fear-mongering. Most of the references are from the early 90's or before....which is nearly 20 years ago now. If ultrasounds are truly so dangerous, why is there no more recent research replicating these "results?"

eminvc is offline  
#29 of 29 Old 11-26-2012, 08:45 PM
 
mauri456's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: va
Posts: 302
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I had my twins at 39.6 weeks.

 

I had an unofficial u/s at 14 weeks cus I suspected 2.  di/di twins

 

20 week u/s

 

28 week u/s  growth/cervix/fluid

 

32 week u/s  growth/cervix/fluid)

 

35 week u/s  (plan was for 36 weeks but my bp went up)- looked at growth/fluid

 

36 week u/s fluid/growth

 

37 week u/s  fluid/growth

 

38 week u/s growth/fluid and one nst

 

39 week u/s fluid and nst twice

 

and 2 ultrasounds in labor to look at positioning.  had my bp not gone up it would have been 36 weeks and 38 weeks.  

mauri456 is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off