Mothering Forum banner
1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,993 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I personally don't want an ultrasound. They are inaccurate, possibly dangerous, and won't reassure me or alarm me. However, my husband is still a little uncomfortable about my choice to birth at home unassisted. I think it would put his mind at ease if I had one, which would help promote good positive energy at the birth and during the pregnancy. Do you think that a single ultrasound at 20 weeks will harm the fetus, or do you feel that it is repeated exposure to ultrasound that mainly is dangerous?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
510 Posts
I only had one us when I was pg - I was still under the care of a CNM at that point and it was just the routine thing to do. I do not plan on having one with my next baby/babies. Only if it were deemed absolutely necessary for some reason. It was a "cool" expereince I guess to be able to see my little baby, but it was obvious to me that HE wasn't enjoying it. He kept punching out at the device as if he wanted it away from him.
I guess, I think there are other ways to get your dh on board and feeling comfortable with the birth. What would the us change for him? Do I think that one ultrasound is going to permanently mess up your baby, well, no probably not. But, if you are opposed to it, then I would listen to that mommy voice. Even once, it is obviously is doing something to the baby inside you, cells are changing at some level due to the sound waves...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,629 Posts
I think one of the things that is dangerous about ultrasounds is we just don't know for sure what the long term effects are. So in my opinion they are just as risky at 20 weeks as at any other time. I have had ultrasounds with both pregancies (first didn't really know better) and the 2nd was twins so I had some before I switched to a midwife. I don't plan on getting anymore with any future pregnancies unless I thought the baby or myself was at risk and we needed one. I wouldn't recommend getting one "just in case." I would only get one if you had warning signs, but that is just me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,101 Posts
Without a good medical indication I vote no.

In the intrest of full disclosure, I had them will all mine. I may not in the future though. Depends. I don't want one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,391 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by moonfirefaery View Post
I personally don't want an ultrasound. They are inaccurate, possibly dangerous, and won't reassure me or alarm me. However, my husband is still a little uncomfortable about my choice to birth at home unassisted. I think it would put his mind at ease if I had one, which would help promote good positive energy at the birth and during the pregnancy. Do you think that a single ultrasound at 20 weeks will harm the fetus, or do you feel that it is repeated exposure to ultrasound that mainly is dangerous?
I have read nothing that convinces me that ever 2 or 3 or even 4 ultrasounds during pregnancy will harm a fetus. Most the literature and studies that suggest that ultrasound is dangerous has not been substantiated or duplicated in other studies. Also a lot of the information posted about US use during pregnancy and the dangers of it is 10-20 years old as well.

Personally I believe 1 ultrasound is not going to cause any harm at all, but may elevate fears for your husband. But truthfully I dont see how/why this is the case. If you are having a healthy pregnancy and are considered low risk for complications, I dont see how an ultrasound will change the way he will feel. Is he specifically concerned about birth defects?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,391 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by gemelos View Post
I think one of the things that is dangerous about ultrasounds is we just don't know for sure what the long term effects are. So in my opinion they are just as risky at 20 weeks as at any other time. I have had ultrasounds with both pregancies (first didn't really know better) and the 2nd was twins so I had some before I switched to a midwife. I don't plan on getting anymore with any future pregnancies unless I thought the baby or myself was at risk and we needed one. I wouldn't recommend getting one "just in case." I would only get one if you had warning signs, but that is just me.

Ultrasound has been used in pregnancy since the 1950s, so I think by now we would know the long term effects of them. I know people in their 30s, born in the 70s whose mothers actually participated in US studies at the Med. School here. I think by now we would see the long term effects, if any, by now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
189 Posts
I also didn't want to have an ultrasound; I was under the care of a CNM, and she said if I wanted, I could have one, but if not, that was completely fine, too.

At 23 weeks, I had a small bleed - red blood. I tend to underworry than overworry things, so I assumed it was no biggie and just went to my next appt as usual (which was about 5 days later). When I told my CNM, she didn't appear worried, but did have me go immediately to an ultrasound. Looking back, I know she was very worried, but was professional enough not to freak us out! Turns out I had placenta previa - complete. So, I ended up with three ultrasounds over the course of the pregnancy to track the previa. Sucked. Luckily for me and DB, the previa went away (just barely - 2 cm off the cervix) by week 37, and I had a normal, drug-free, perfect birth.

So, I guess I'm agreeing with the above posters - if there is any sort of indication of trouble, do get the ultrasound. There are risks to any decision, and you of course will weigh them. The US in this case helped me change my behavior during pregnancy, and possibly saved DB's life, and at the very least helped us get to a point where we could have that lovely natural birth. However, if there are no indications of risk, there's really no point.

That said, because of my history, I will definitely be getting one ultrasound at 20 weeks, if we have another baby, simply because my risk of previa is higher.
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top