Here's the situation, you're pregnant and....
By mommyboo
@mommyboo (13174)
United States
July 5, 2008 11:36am CST
...you have a choice of getting an ultrasound to check the growth of your baby. You also have the choice of getting tested for various abnormalities via a test called AFP or triple screen. This test can detect certain things like neural tube defects, problems with formation of the abdominal wall or esophagus, renal or urinary tract problems, and a low level can indicate down syndrome.
Now - do you really want to know or not? Don't answer quickly, think about it. Most babies are normal, even if you are sick during your pregnancy or have a lot of stress. I had two ultrasounds while I was pregnant, ultrasound is not dangerous to a baby nor a mother. It is not invasive. There is no drugs, surgery or other 'damage' involved yet you can see the baby and get a good idea of whether it is developing properly. I declined the AFP/triple screen. I declined other tests such as amniocentesis - which is where fluid is drawn out of the amniotic sac with a large needle to test the baby's cells. This CAN be dangerous, babies have been poked before.
My personal feeling is that whatever would not be caught on an ultrasound, I wouldn't want to know. I don't want to spend my pregnancy worried about my baby. Some folks say they'd want to know so they can be 'prepared'. Prepared for what? All kids are different. A perceived disability or condition is not really known until the baby is here, and after that, the extent would not be known until the baby is older. Why would you want to know about something that would only make you miserable? Also, there is a high chance of false positives with these tests. Mothers have had a test and been told their baby has a genetic abnormality or will be born with down's syndrome. Then these mothers give birth - to a healthy normal baby. All that misery and stress for nothing!
What would you do?
3 people like this
18 responses
@StrawberryKisses (2833)
• Canada
5 Jul 08
I myself had the tests done with both my pregnancies but never put any faith in them at all. I just did the test to shut the doctor up lol. When I first got pregnant I was told by other thats the tests were very inaccurate so I never let it both me. And neither one of my kids have anything wrong with them so I would give women then advice that if they want the test done not to think it is 100%.
There was a girl out here that was preggers and she had the test done and her chances were like 2% and she was going to actually have the amnio done. I couldn't believe anyone would risk their babies life that way. I was never offered an amnio nor would I ever want one.
3 people like this
@mommyboo (13174)
• United States
6 Jul 08
I don't think the doctor should harrass you about the tests! I wasn't really harrassed but I did have to say that I said no once and I meant no, and they really should not bring it up again. My daughter was normal and healthy. I was asked about an amnio and I said no immediately. The only thing I okayed was a second level 2 ultrasound and that was because we wanted to see how big she was getting - and find out her gender because she hid from us the first time.
@newtondak (3946)
• United States
6 Jul 08
I say yes, I would have the tests. Having worked very closely with a number of child health specialists, I am aware that there are many conditions that can be diagnosed prior to birth, many of which can also be treated before birth.
Such testing can also alert the doctors if there are conditions which might need immediate surgery at birth, or which might need to be monitored closely and perhaps labor induced or a cesarean section performed early if the condition should appear to worsen.
I believe that testing and the close monitoring that can follow has saved the lives of many babies.
1 person likes this
@newtondak (3946)
• United States
6 Jul 08
Unless there is something that warrants the extra tests, insurance companies will not approve them and will not pay for them. They must be considered to be standard practice for a normal pregnancy.
@maximax8 (31046)
• United Kingdom
24 Oct 08
I have been pregnant twice and I have enjoyed a natural as possible time and a home birth. I had ultrasound scans and no other tests. My sister's test came back with a high probability that her child would have Down Syndrome however when born the baby girl was normal. Such tests that have results like a 1 in a 100 chance of Down Syndrome might scare many people. Being frightened in pregnancy is not healthy or enjoyable. If a lady finds out she is carrying a disabled baby the hospital staff have a chance to get her to consider having an abortion. At 36 weeks pregnancy I was told I was having a spina bifida baby (neural tube defects) and that they didn't know what my son would be like. I was told his condition might not be compatible with life and when born they would tell me his chances. He was born at home then taken to a special care baby unit. He had two operations and now he is 17 months old. He may have a wheelchair when he is older and he has to have catheter care. Whether normal or disabled every baby is special and deserves loving parents.
1 person likes this
@mommyboo (13174)
• United States
26 Oct 08
I agree, which is why I started this discussion. I will admit that sometimes for SOME people it is better for them to know ahead of time, but for ME it would ruin the experience and the journey and make me sad and depressed during a time that should be happy. I have had situations happen where I have THOUGHT something awful was going to happen and been even physically sick over it - then I find out everything is fine. I cannot get that time back that I was worried or sick or upset, so it has been wasted and I have a regret. My hope is that other people don't have to feel that way. I think we put too much faith in things that are fraught with human error.
@StarChild517 (657)
• United States
19 Jul 08
Well I had the fetal protein test and came out negative for all of it, but they discovered my baby has only 2 vessels in her umbilical cord but so far nothing else has been found wrong with her (im currently 34 weeks)I am kinda glad she has the 2 vesseled cord cause I get to see my baby on ultrasound every 4 weeks to make sure shes growing and she has been its wonderful to see her sitting up and playing with her little toes and bouncing and hitting her head at the top of my uterus at 20 weeks.
1 person likes this
@mommyboo (13174)
• United States
19 Jul 08
Congratulations! I know other people this happened to (two vessels instead of three) and it is kind of nice to get regular ultrasounds to see your little precious so often. My daughter was so smashed up by the time she was 20 weeks when I had the second ultrasound, we could see her face but not as clear as when she was only 16 weeks. I think she was running out of room in there!
@mescue (64)
• United States
7 Jul 08
I don't actually remember what tests I had done. I know I had the ultrasounds. I didn't have an amniocentesis. I just followed my doctor's recommendations for testing. I've been with the same OB for so long, I trust what he says. The way I feel, my daughter didn't ask to be born. We wanted her. I would have loved her any which way she came out. I agree that even with the testing, no one can be fully prepared. I couldn't have been prepared for a preemie.
@mommyboo (13174)
• United States
7 Jul 08
That's one of those questions with no answers, isn't it? I was a preemie, 8 weeks early. I was so scared that my daughter would also be a preemie, and small. I was about 2 1/2 lbs but I'm a pretty small person anyway. My daughter was a week early and 7 lbs, 4 oz, no danger of her being small lol.
@soooobored (1184)
• United States
19 Jul 08
I've seen far too many false positives on the triple screen, and even if something "undesirable" did come back, I wouldn't have an abortion. So it seems pointless for me to do it.
1 person likes this
@mommyboo (13174)
• United States
19 Jul 08
I feel that way too. That's why I posted this discussion to see if other moms felt that false positives when it wouldn't change what you would do are worth it. To me, no they are not. If you spend months thinking your baby is going to die or have some awful defect and then the baby is born fine, you cannot get that time that you spent worried and sick and stressed back, know what I mean?
@34momma (13882)
• United States
6 Jul 08
i would want to know if there was something wrong with my baby before the baby was born. if i was high risk and they recommended that i take certain test to make sure everything is ok, i would do it. i am blessed to have three healthy wonderful children. I had my tubes tied so i am not expecting to have any more babies. but i am 36 and if for some crazy reason i got pregnant, i would take whatever test they wanted me too
1 person likes this
@mommyboo (13174)
• United States
7 Jul 08
If I was high risk I would likely take advantage of whatever would give me and the baby the best chance of a full term, healthy pregnancy. I'm not considered high risk though and I don't like the idea of treating every pregnant woman as high risk and making all these tests something mandatory without a reason. Another poster mentioned the fact that ins companies do not pay for things that are not necessary, but I do know that they would have paid for the tests I declined.
@Carrie26 (1587)
• United States
5 Jul 08
No I wouldnt.I had a test done where they tested my blood and though my son might have down syndrome.I got ultra sounds done but didnt do the aminoceintieses as I dont like A needle being inserted in my stomach and plus I was going to keep my son regardless if he had down syndrom or not.Them tests I dont like as they arent always accurate(the blood tests for abnormalalities).My son was born healthy and had no down syndrome so it goes to show that tests arent always accurte and can cause you to worry to much and could possibly lose the baby by worrying.
@mommyboo (13174)
• United States
6 Jul 08
Thanks! That's in a nutshell exactly the way I feel about it. If it wouldn't chance your decision to keep your baby, then what purpose does it serve? None. But it can make the joyous 9 months of pregnancy a horrible time and I don't understand why somebody would want to do that. I'd rather spend that time happy.
@wachit14 (3595)
• United States
6 Jul 08
You raise some excellent points! I might add that the amnio is in no way fool proof and many times that test ends up in a false positive which can cause undue stress. Many abnormalities show up in other ways, but I will say that the decision for me about having such a test would depend on the age of the mother.
A young mother is less likely to produce a child with such abnormalities that these tests would detect. As women age, their eggs start to deteriorate and as a result are more likely to produce a child with birth defects. I think women need to make an informed decision with their doctor in the overall scheme and hopefully come up with a pregnancy plan that works for everyone.
@mommyboo (13174)
• United States
7 Jul 08
Usually they only ask about an amnio for two reasons - either you have some family history of problems or you're AMA - advanced maternal age, which I think is 36. I have no idea why I was offered it because I have neither anything risky in my family history nor was I 36 lol.
@underdogtoo (9579)
• Philippines
6 Jul 08
Pregnancies are scary, and I'm a guy!!! I'm glad I'm done with passing my genes and the whole process of heredity and what-not. My boys were big, healthy boys and I am glad that is all over. I just need to worry about making enough money to feed them. Cheers!!
@revellanotvanella (4033)
• United States
5 Jul 08
I agree with you completely and although I have not had alot of faith in conventional medicine I think the last thing I'd want to do is put stress on my beautiful child while in the womb and believe babies are more resilent than we think if left to themselves with a good diet and fairly healthy mother. Now for mothers have already have disorders like diabetes or sickle cell running in their families I guess this would be necessary.
@mommyboo (13174)
• United States
6 Jul 08
If I had health conditions that made my pregnancy high risk, or disorders running in my family that were things that could be passed on by either parent, then I would consider genetic testing and extra ultrasounds and a specialist. However, I have none of that going against me, and I know that women have gotten pregnant without help and had babies without help for decades, so if everything is normal, the expectation would be that everything would be fine.
@Gargoyle0134 (1257)
• United States
6 Jul 08
I think I would stick to simple ultrasound? I wouldn't go for the "amnio." It woudl be WAY out there for me to consent to more than ultrasound.
1 person likes this
@mommyboo (13174)
• United States
7 Jul 08
That's how I felt. Ultrasound is not invasive, not painful to mother or baby, and is a very good diagnostic tool useful throughout pregnancy and also with other conditions. The idea of an amnio is somewhat worrisome, I just don't think poking a needle anywhere near a developing unborn baby is a sane or safe idea. I mean there would have to be a VERY good medically necessary reason.
@blackmantra_x (2732)
• Philippines
6 Jul 08
good day..it's better to know than not know as to be prepared emotionally and financially. We've got to trust the doctor if not find one that you can trust because they know best. Just my one cent.
@mommyboo (13174)
• United States
7 Jul 08
Very good point. I did make sure that I chose a doctor that viewed my pregnancy as I did, as a natural occurrence and not like I was sick or had a disease. A doctor is supposed to be your partner in healthcare, not a dictator, as a patient or client, it is always your decision what you do.
@chrysz (1602)
• Philippines
6 Jul 08
First and foremost, the tests you mentioned are very expensive here in the Philippines. I had two ultrasound in my recent pregnancy which already cost 700 pesos/each (around 150USD) and I was just glad that my baby is physically complete. I contacted rubella while pregnant and I know that the my child could be deaf (it was confirmed just last month that she really was) but I prayed hard that no other other abnormalities would come up.
I know that sometimes these tests could "prepare" you for the worst case scenario but lets face it that the accuracy is never 100% so I wouldn't have it. I just keep my faith to the Lord and I know He won't let a child suffer.
@gemini_rose (16264)
•
6 Jul 08
I would have the tests, if I thought that there was a problem with any baby I was carrying then I would want to know as much as possible. I am lucky in that all of the tests showed my babies to be healthy and so I never had to worry about anything being wrong.
@Bluepatch (2476)
• Trinidad And Tobago
5 Jul 08
I agree with this. You're not going to know anything really definite until the baby is born so why not wait and then see.
Most women, it seems to me, worry unnecessarily about their babies and nowadays, with all the testing abilties we have, spend far too much on tests.
Just wait till your baby is born.
You're going to love your baby no matter what !
@yenwie84 (1344)
• Malaysia
6 Jul 08
I am still single now so I don't have any experience of being pregnant. But if this is a question for me to imagine the answer. I think I will choose to do all the tests whenever possible if I suspect my baby to have certain abnormalities. If the tests show positive results, I think I will do abortion. I don't want my baby to suffer in the future,to be discriminated by the society. I don't want the baby to blame me for bringing him to this world since he has such abnormality. That's what I can think of now,maybe the answer sounds selfish but who knows when things really happen,everything will be different again. Since now I still cannot consider how's mother feeling towards child.
