Not decided, but might not get an u/s

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-24-2007
Not decided, but might not get an u/s
7
Sat, 05-22-2010 - 7:31am

I am torn on this, because ultrasounds are fun.
But on the other hand, part of me realizes that until recently, no one had ultrasounds, and like cell phones, they aren't necessary. Life went on before them, and would still go on without one.

We want to be totally surprised as to the gender (DD was a surprise, DS wasn't, and we want this one to be a surprise at birth) and I would like to see what it's like to NOT ultrasound, since they aren't totally risk-free, anyway, at least according to some articles.

DH kind of wants an ultrasound, and I am on the fence, leaning away from having one this time.

Anyone else ever gone "au natural" with their pregnancy and want to tell about it?

(no horror stories about someone you heard of once, please, as I can match horror stories of someone who suffered a terrible fate due to not testing for everything, with an equal horror story about someone who suffered a terrible fate BECAUSE of too much invasive management of their pregnancy, and don't want this to be a hot topic or offend anyone)


 

-Meg

Loving life as an 0ver-35 mom and Postal Wife, homeschooling, urban homesteading, relaxed crunchy/geek hybrid housewife, trying to live consciously in an age of media hypnosis

<a href="http://lilypie.com

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-21-2007
Sat, 05-22-2010 - 9:51am

We avoid ultrasounds.

Amanda


Mom to Talia (3)


expecting #2 on 1/11/11

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-15-2008
Sat, 05-22-2010 - 11:45am

I plan for two ultrasounds this pregnancy, one around 8wks to confirm, and one between 15-20 weeks to check for possible genetic abnormalities. Last pregnancy I also ended up with an additional one at 38 weeks to confirm the baby had flipped (doctor thought the baby was breach).

Sure, ultrasound scans are considered generally safe....but it is introducing energy to the system (both your abdomen and the developing fetus).

I will never visit a mall or retail store that does ultrasounds, or get a 3D scan -- the lack of medical training and the high power used is not a risk I'm willing to take. The u/s I've gotten in the past have also been fairly low power -- my doctor's office seems to start with things turned down. So, the pictures haven't been as crisp and clear as other u/s pictures I've seen, but my baby hasn't been exposed to as much energy as those with the nice clear pictures either.

They are fun...but are not necessary. Good luck with your decision.





-Dawn











Photobucket

-Dawn
Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-05-2007
Sun, 05-23-2010 - 1:33am

We try to do as few ultrasounds as possible, as quickly as possible for all the reasons that pps mention. We had one last Thursday to confirm a viable pregnancy and to date (so I can get accurate blood work for genetic testing), will have one at 11 weeks for the nuchal scan, then will have one at 22 weeks for an anatomical scan. We won't find out the baby's sex until he or she is born.

Its totally possible and might even be advisable to avoid all ultrasounds, but I also know that some anatomical abnormalities can prove life threatening if not picked up in the 20-22 week scan or the damage can be lessened if they can prepare for the abnormality (by scheduling surgery, monitoring the baby differently once he/she is born) before the baby is born.

Good luck. You definitely have the right to refuse and I don't think you would be misguided in doing so, depending on the decisions you would make with the information you would gather from the scans.


Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 01-11-2009
Sun, 05-23-2010 - 10:44am

I'm leaning toward no ultrasounds this time around, which is wildly different than my last pregnancy when I had LITERALLY fifteen of them! I'd had recent surgery on my cervix before getting pregnant with DS, so my OB wanted to monitor my cervix very closely for signs of incompetent cervix. I was too naive back then to question it, but have become much more knowledgeable since.

It's going to be tough to resist that 20 week ultrasound and gender reveal, so I'm still not sure if I have what it takes! But I know the midwife I've chosen will have my back if I decide no ultrasound.

Photobucket


Lilypie Second Birthday tickers


Photobucket


chelsea-2

<

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-24-2007
Sun, 05-23-2010 - 2:33pm
Well Chelsea,
if it helps to know, the temptation to get the 20 week gender reveal isn't all it's cracked up to be... you could decide to get it, and then the baby could have crossed legs. That happened to us with our first. We wanted a surprise, then couldn't stand the suspense and said yes, and lo and behold, her legs were crossed, so we had to bear with having a surprise anyway! LOL


 

-Meg

Loving life as an 0ver-35 mom and Postal Wife, homeschooling, urban homesteading, relaxed crunchy/geek hybrid housewife, trying to live consciously in an age of media hypnosis

<a href="http://lilypie.com

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-28-2008
Sun, 05-23-2010 - 8:31pm
Huh, I never knew about any possible dangers of ultrasounds. I will still get the 20 week u/s to hopefully see if it's a boy or girl though. But I may use this as an excuse to skip the wand!





Photobucket


Thanks for my siggy Sheryl! (sheryls83)





PhotobucketPhotobucketPhotobucket


FuzziBunz at Nurtured Family









iVillage Member
Registered: 12-11-2006
Sun, 05-23-2010 - 11:58pm
All they really want with an u/s is to measure baby and to make sure there are no deformities with the heart or head. I don't see any problem with skipping out on it. It just helps get the NICU and parents ready if there is something wrong.
http://natlisitsbetterthanskittles.blogspot.com/

Photobucket Thanks to tiny_voices for the siggy!

Daisypath Anniversary Years Ticker


Lilypie Kids birthday Ticker