Mothering Forum banner

1 - 20 of 43 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
638 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Well we have decided that there is no reason to have an ultrasound this time around. We are excited about not finding out the sex and nothing they would tell us would cause us to end this pregnancy so why? right?<br><br>
I will be 35 when I give birth so I am getting some grief from family, but my intuition says this baby is A OK so I am trying to ignore them. Our last pregnancy had some problems and we ended up with 4 ultrasounds and that to me is just too too many...<br><br>
Anyone think I am crazy? Anyone think this is a good thing to do?<br><br>
~Steph
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,310 Posts
Me too, although my DH wants one but I think I have him convinced to skip it. I only want to do one if their is a real medical need. Finding out the sex is not a medical need.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,218 Posts
I will be 36 on Sunday and we are doing no testing except a blood test to see if I have been sensitized to rhesus positive blood (I'm O-, dd is O+, I've had a m/c and also an abortion; even though I had rhogam with all of those, there's still a possibility of sensitization; also, if I'm sensitized, then I know for sure I don't need rhogam this time around, which is something I'm really debating about getting). DH had a snitfit about the risk of Downs earlier in the pregnancy, but this is the way I see it ...<br><br>
At 35, the risk of genetic problems is still quite low (around 0.5%). That is low enough that I am not willing to risk the complications of a definitive test like an amnio or CVS. All other "tests" are really screenings (like the first trimester screen, the quad screen, ultrasounds, etc.). None of those can give a definitive answer, and in fact, have very high rates of false positives. So getting a negative result from those screens might give me a sense of security, but getting a positive result would just stress me out for the rest of the pregnancy. Knowing how often the positives are false, I would not feel justified risking my baby's life to know for sure (my personal decision, based on my history, intuition, etc.). If I was willing to go on with the definitive testing, then I might decide to start with the screenings first, and then use the results to decide on continuing with testing. But I'm not willing to go on with the testing.<br><br>
So with the very reasonable possibility of the screening results just leaving me freaked out and stressed for the rest of the pregnancy, I decided not to do them.<br><br>
Like you, I have a very strong, intuitive sense that everything is going to be just fine with this baby. I also get a VERY strong sense from this baby that it wants to be left alone. It does not want me to use doppler, u/s, etc. It has told me over and over that all will be well, to trust in my body, etc.<br><br>
Listen to your gut, and ignore the naysayers <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/hug.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="hug">. I don't think you're crazy <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/winky.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="Wink">.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
450 Posts
You can always get an ultrasound later if you change your mind. Why not just put it off until you're sure?<br><br>
I thought about skipping, but I was way too excited to see my baby's little skull-face, and also just to see that my baby had all her parts in the right place. It did make me relax a little when I saw that my baby looked healthy.<br><br>
But I wanted the sex to be a surprise. Everyone thought it was a boy. The best part of childbirth for me was when I heard my sister shout, "It's a GIRL!" And I said, "It's a girl?" And she said, "IT'S A GIRL!!!" (She really wanted me to have a girl.)<br><br>
Ooooh, I'm so excited for you!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
188 Posts
<span><b>No I am with you, at least in theory if not practice. I had planned to not have any and be 100% natural but the suspense is just too much, I wanna see it. I have always been the kid that opened presents early and peeked at gifts before xmas...</b></span>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,402 Posts
I get ultrasounds but that is only because I'm comfortable with it. If you're not by all means you should skip it! Go with your gut!<br><br><img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/hug.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="hug">
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
669 Posts
We're doing the same thing. I feel really great about this pregnancy and see no reason to use any unneccessary tools or tests.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
548 Posts
I'm with you OP. We are having our third in May (God willing) and have opted out of any scans or tests of any kind.<br>
We all need to remember that ultrasound is not risk free and it's not pleasant for the baby. The British Medical Journal published an article a few years back which showed that the sound from US during a scan is equivalent to when you stand in the subway as the train approaches.<br>
There is a mounting body of evidence that scans may not be as safe as they have purported to be and they are not licensed for routine use.<br>
If I had a medical problem or reason to need screening I would certainly have an US but not for fun or to see the baby - I hope to spend the next 18 years at least looking at his/her face!!<br>
Sorry to be so gloomy but...........
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,206 Posts
What if there is some defect that could be fixed by surgery during pregnancy, and that would be safer for the child? Or what if there is a defect that can be fixed after birth but would necessitate a c-section (heart defect, open spina bifida)? I am all for limiting sonograms and not finding out the gender, but are there are positive things to be learned from them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
548 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>Galatea</strong> <a href="/community/forum/post/9925014"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/community/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">What if there is some defect that could be fixed by surgery during pregnancy, and that would be safer for the child? Or what if there is a defect that can be fixed after birth but would necessitate a c-section (heart defect, open spina bifida)? I am all for limiting sonograms and not finding out the gender, but are there are positive things to be learned from them.</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
Well, I suppose the thing is (from my point of view) is that ultrasound is not perfect and only diagnoses a percentage of those conditions so if I had an US and it showed something like a heart defect, I would know that the degree of severity etc could not be accurately predicted and so would probably not accept a different birth as a result, unless I instinctively knew there was a problem myself. But, if I had reason to believe I was likely to have a child who had a difficulty then I might accept the risks of ultrasonography. Equally if US could give me a 100% answer about anything at all, I might be more willing. What I personally try to avoid is creating a situation of doubt that cannot be resolved until the baby is born that will make the pregnancy more difficult and stressful, because I don't believe that is good for anyone including the baby.<br>
I also believe that when we look to medical science and technology to tell us things about ourselves (and what is within us) for a natural state like pregnancy, rather than an illness, we lose something along the way. This time I'm tuning in and so far baby says he/she is doing great.<br>
Just my feelings and I do understand why people want US and why some people need it too. I am lucky to have a family without conditions that I would worry about and to be young and having had two very healthy children before.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,402 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>Patrick's mummy</strong> <a href="/community/forum/post/9924029"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/community/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">I'm with you OP. We are having our third in May (God willing) and have opted out of any scans or tests of any kind.<br>
We all need to remember that ultrasound is not risk free and it's not pleasant for the baby. The British Medical Journal published an article a few years back which showed that the sound from US during a scan is equivalent to when you stand in the subway as the train approaches.<br>
There is a mounting body of evidence that scans may not be as safe as they have purported to be and they are not licensed for routine use.<br>
If I had a medical problem or reason to need screening I would certainly have an US but not for fun or to see the baby - I hope to spend the next 18 years at least looking at his/her face!!<br>
Sorry to be so gloomy but...........</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
There are those of us here who have had them and who need them so please don't go into the horror that the baby goes through during one. IMO that's really insensitive.<br><br>
I completely 100% support the OP and her choice to not have a sonogram but I don't need to come here and read how horrible an us is for a baby when I've already had 3, count them THREE, this pregnancy.<br><br><img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="/img/vbsmilies/smilies/gloomy.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="Gloomy">:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
42,824 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>Galatea</strong> <a href="/community/forum/post/9925014"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/community/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">What if there is some defect that could be fixed by surgery during pregnancy, and that would be safer for the child? Or what if there is a defect that can be fixed after birth but would necessitate a c-section (heart defect, open spina bifida)? I am all for limiting sonograms and not finding out the gender, but are there are positive things to be learned from them.</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
There are VERY VERY few in-utero surgeries being done. In fact NONE that are the standard of care. You have to get into a research group to even be able to consider it.<br><br>
There are few issues where a c-section would really help.<br><br>
I personally feel they cause MUCH more stress and many more problems with the false-scares than they even begin to solve.<br><br>
There has been NO study showing better outcomes with standard u/s.<br><br>
-Angela
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
548 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>lovingmommyhood</strong> <a href="/community/forum/post/9925435"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/community/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">There are those of us here who have had them and who need them so please don't go into the horror that the baby goes through during one. IMO that's really insensitive.<br><br>
I completely 100% support the OP and her choice to not have a sonogram but I don't need to come here and read how horrible an us is for a baby when I've already had 3, count them THREE, this pregnancy.<br><br><img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="/img/vbsmilies/smilies/gloomy.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="Gloomy">:</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
Hi<br>
I'm sorry you felt I was being insensitive, that wasn't my intention. Obviously if you have *needed* to have them, then the benefits of doing so in your particular circumstances would outweigh unpleasantness.<br>
I was particularly responding to posters who were talking about being motivated to use US to "see" the baby and/or know the gender. IMO we should make informed decisions about using unlicensed technology for routine reasons and AFAIK those people might not have been aware of how it is for the baby. I certainly wasn't when I had my first two babies and I wish I had been.<br>
As I said in my earlier post I have been blessed to not need US in this pregnancy and I do know I am blessed. I was just sharing information I felt relevant to the thread but am sorry you felt I was insensitive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
42,824 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>lovingmommyhood</strong> <a href="/community/forum/post/9925435"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/community/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">There are those of us here who have had them and who need them so please don't go into the horror that the baby goes through during one. IMO that's really insensitive.<br><br>
I completely 100% support the OP and her choice to not have a sonogram but I don't need to come here and read how horrible an us is for a baby when I've already had 3, count them THREE, this pregnancy.<br><br><img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="/img/vbsmilies/smilies/gloomy.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="Gloomy">:</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
*IF* it is truly that horrifying of an experience for the baby (I don't know- I haven't researched that in-depth as I choose not to use them) then I think it is very important that we DO go into that horror. If it is truly awful for the baby, then we all need to know that in order to make educated decisions.<br><br>
-Angela
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,625 Posts
I have no firm plans to have or not have an ultrasound with this pregnancy. I may have a quick one towards the end to check the position of the baby and placenta, but only if there's ambiguity about either. I certainly think it's a great technology in some circumstances, but it freaks me out how over-used it is. I like that at least here people are honest about all the uncertainties surrounding ultrasound.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,402 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>alegna</strong> <a href="/community/forum/post/9925660"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/community/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">*IF* it is truly that horrifying of an experience for the baby (I don't know- I haven't researched that in-depth as I choose not to use them) then I think it is very important that we DO go into that horror. If it is truly awful for the baby, then we all need to know that in order to make educated decisions.<br><br>
-Angela</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
I guess I didn't realize this was a "debate the merits of U/S" thread. I thought it was the OP asking if it was a good idea to skip U/S. Had I known it was the former I wouldn't have posted at all. Congrats to all that don't need U/S I guess. <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="/img/vbsmilies/smilies/gloomy.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="Gloomy">:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,793 Posts
Oh man what of can of worms here. <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/lol.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="lol"><br><br>
I have no problems with Ultrasounds. None what so ever.<br><br>
That being said, the ultrasound is only as good as the tech doing the ultrasound and the doctor who is reading them AND the equipment being used.<br><br>
I think there is a vast difference in utlrasound equipment out there. The equipment they used on me yesterday was awesome. The detail was amazing (this was either a 3D or 4D machine). Contrast to the vaginal utrasound machine my OB has. IT DOESN'T COMPARE!<br><br>
The equipment is available to use, I only see advantages to having it done. No disadvantages. If my child has a heart defect, then I want to know so they can have medical staff available immediately.<br><br>
Well thats my opinion. If a Mama doesn't want one, then fine. But thats not for me or what I want for my baby.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,793 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>Patrick's mummy</strong> <a href="/community/forum/post/9925360"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/community/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">Well, I suppose the thing is (from my point of view) is that ultrasound is not perfect and only diagnoses a percentage of those conditions so if I had an US and it showed something like a heart defect, I would know that the degree of severity etc could not be accurately predicted and so would probably not accept a different birth as a result, unless I instinctively knew there was a problem myself. But, if I had reason to believe I was likely to have a child who had a difficulty then I might accept the risks of ultrasonography. Equally if US could give me a 100% answer about anything at all, I might be more willing. What I personally try to avoid is creating a situation of doubt that cannot be resolved until the baby is born that will make the pregnancy more difficult and stressful, because I don't believe that is good for anyone including the baby.<br>
I also believe that when we look to medical science and technology to tell us things about ourselves (and what is within us) for a natural state like pregnancy, rather than an illness, we lose something along the way. This time I'm tuning in and so far baby says he/she is doing great.<br>
Just my feelings and I do understand why people want US and why some people need it too. I am lucky to have a family without conditions that I would worry about and to be young and having had two very healthy children before.</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
<br>
Well I thought my daughter was fine in utero. Snort, my intuition was wrong.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
42,824 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>lovingmommyhood</strong> <a href="/community/forum/post/9925846"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/community/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">I guess I didn't realize this was a "debate the merits of U/S" thread. I thought it was the OP asking if it was a good idea to skip U/S. Had I known it was the former I wouldn't have posted at all. Congrats to all that don't need U/S I guess. <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="/img/vbsmilies/smilies/gloomy.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="Gloomy">:</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
<img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/hug.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="hug"><br><br>
I guess you'd need to define "needing" an u/s. I think there are certainly situations where they are excellent tools and the possible benefits outweigh any risk. The problem is that there is not enough research to know when those situations are for sure.<br><br>
It was not so very long ago that it was standard care to x-ray pregnant women. My dh was x-rayed in-utero (twin pregnancy) and yet no one would consider that "worth the risk" today.<br><br>
-Angela
 
1 - 20 of 43 Posts
Top