I know some people choose not to use ultrasound at all, no matter where their choice of birth. I want a homebirth next time but I just have a feeling that I would be much more comfortable if a routine ultrasound around 20 weeks showed everything was developing normally. My first worry is placenta previa. My second would be some kind of congenital problem with the baby. My niece for example was going to be born in a homebirth, with no ultrasound, but when my SIL was about 35 weeks her midwife got suspicious that something was up. SIL's fundal height had jumped dramatically from one week to the next and the midwife wanted to know what was going on. It turned out my niece had heart defects and other issues, and the sudden increase in uterine size was due to a jump in amniotic fluid, which happens a lot (although not always) with the kind of condition my niece has. SIL changed to a high-risk OB and delivered DN in a hospital, where she had to be immediately resuscitated and needed quite a lot of care. If she had been born at home they might not have been able to save her--at the least, it certainly would have been very traumatic and upsetting for everyone. What if the amniotic fluid hadn't caused a problem that could be noted externally? I think if I knew in advance that something were medically wrong with my baby, I would definitely want to be in a hospital environment for the birth. So I feel like the prudent thing would be to have an ultrasound to rule that out. I know not everyone agrees with that risk assessment, though, and I do worry about the safety of ultrasound, so I'm wondering how other mamas weigh the risks and come to a decision.