Mothering Forum banner

how many ultrasounds are "safe"?

3867 Views 11 Replies 9 Participants Last post by  Twice as nice
I've already had 2 ultrasounds with my OB. The first was March 8, the other yesterday. Is this too many since a third would be coming in 4 weeks? I am planning on switching to a birthing center/midwife in 2 weeks, so this third appt. with my OB won't take place. (but assuming an ultrasound will happen at the midwife's office) I still was hoping to have that next ultrasound to determine the gender, but is that too many? I've read little about the risks - something about cells being affected, and left-handedness in boys. I think my dd had only 2 ultrasounds.
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
The safest ultrasound is no ultrasound at all.
It's definitely safer to have no ultrasounds, or as few as possible. While ultrasound is only a 25 year old technology (or so), we don't know a lot about the long-term effects though. What we do know though, is that the theoretical problems are not good, and the risk increases with exposure.
The fewer the better. Zero = best, at least in my book!

The thing about u/s is that the technology heats up the cells and there is really no information/studies/knowledge on how this actually affects/effects the human body. Earlier u/s (meaning early in the life of the fetus) would seem to be more harmful than later ones because the cells and more fragile and still working to establish themselves, but all u/s have as yet to be satisfactorily defined, at least in my mind. I believe we don't understand the possible and even probable ramifications of using them.
Quote:

Originally Posted by littleteapot
The safest ultrasound is no ultrasound at all.
See less See more
I'll be getting one to determine the sex of our little muffin...but that'll probably be it for us!
I have some concerns about ultrasounds as well. My OB told me that I would have to have several ultrasounds after 20 weeks to track the growth of my twins (which cant be done by measuring the stomach since one baby may be growing faster than the other). Im not really thrilled about repetitious u/s.

I was thinking of declining them unless they are looking for some specific problems that can be corrected (the way I see it is even if they do detect a problem, if nothing can be done to correct it, what's the point of discovering it since all you get is extra worry and no way to fix it?)

Do you think I would be justified in declining them? Can anything be done if the docs find that one baby is growing faster than the other?
Quote:

Originally Posted by HATAWA
Do you think I would be justified in declining them? Can anything be done if the docs find that one baby is growing faster than the other?
I think you're justified.
Can anything be done? No. They might want to give you a c-section early, though.

I think the most difficult thing about a twin pregnancy appears to be the stress everyone ELSE puts on you about being high risk. I'm sure lots of women have terrible diets and don't take care of themselves enough to support ONE baby, let alone two! So I imagine many of these 'emergencies' were completely preventable.
I've been reading a lot about twin pregnancies lately and it seems that research is showing the reason twins are so often premature is because they're starving in the womb and they come out ot eat! Moms don't eat enough. Otherwise there's no logical reason for them to come out, it's not like you'll run out of space with just two.
See less See more
Quote:

Originally Posted by HATAWA
Do you think I would be justified in declining them? Can anything be done if the docs find that one baby is growing faster than the other?
What they're looking for is twin-to-twin transfusion sydrome, which happens when a twin pregnancy is sharing a single placenta (so, usually an identical twin pregnancy), and too much blood goes to one twin, not enough to the other. So one twin grows big, the other grows small.

That's a very very off the top of my head and not entirely technically accurate explanation, but that's the basic gist of it.

If it did happen, premature delivery could save the life of one or both twins. From what I've read, the outcome is often pretty bad for at least one of the babies if it's allowed to progress.

If it were me, I'd be asking the doctors why they felt this was necessary. Is it standard procedure during twin pregnancies, or is it because the babies are sharing a placenta?

http://www.tttsfoundation.org/warning%20signs.html has a list of non-ultrasound warning signs you can keep an eye out for.

(This isn't to say that there aren't other reasons they might be looking for disproportionate growth - that's just the big one with twins that I'm aware of)
See less See more
My questions would then be: how likely is Twin to twin? How many cases in each identical pregnancy are there? They like to blanket people....

I'd also be looking it up online to see what kind of evidence there is about it's cause. Obviously people have been having twins for millions of years and not every set of identicals die or suffer with it...
Quote:

Originally Posted by ocelotmom

If it were me, I'd be asking the doctors why they felt this was necessary. Is it standard procedure during twin pregnancies, or is it because the babies are sharing a placenta?

I've already had 1 ultrasound @ 7 wks (I was bleeding & thought I was miscarrying), which is when they discovered the twins. The u/s tech told me that everything is completely separate (sacs & placentas)... thank God


Thanks for your advice!!!
See less See more
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top