Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Internet Search
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
General Discussions
The Watercooler
Need some opinions - Preggo Ques!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="slsh" data-source="post: 176734" data-attributes="member: 8"><p>Beth,</p><p> </p><p>First off, I am of the same mind as you in terms of if a potential "diagnosis" was picked up on screening. Things turn out how they're supposed to, even if we don't always get it.</p><p> </p><p>I had the blood test that was supposed to pick up twins and Downs' syndrome back in the dark ages. Everything was "normal". When I got kidney stones at 21 weeks and was found to be in pre-term labor, the ultrasound tech thought he'd take a peek at my baby while he was checking out the kidneys. Imagine the shock when he said there were 2 babies! <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /> So... I'm not a huge believer in absolute accuracy of testing.</p><p> </p><p>on the other hand, they are doing some amazing things now with kiddos who have neural tube defects (i.e. in-utero surgery to close the defect prior to birth). I have to admit, if I had the ability to "fix" a problem and possibly prevent a physical disability, I would go for it. While that kind of flies in the face of "things turn out how they're supposed to", somehow ... it makes sense to me, I guess because maybe *because* of how things turned out with Boo, even though his situation wasn't preventable at the time.</p><p> </p><p>Since the NT is noninvasive, I'd do it. At the very least, it would give you and the doctor the opportunity to prepare if there is the possibility of a problem, rather than having all heck break lose at delivery, you know? </p><p> </p><p>But if the stress of knowing there might be a problem (again, I really took pregnancy related tests with a grain of salt after the twins) is going to cause greater harm... I think it's perfectly reasonable not to do it, too.</p><p> </p><p>How's that for an on-the-fence answer? I guess, as with all things related to motherhood, my strongest vote would be to follow your heart. You will make the right choice for you and the wee one.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="slsh, post: 176734, member: 8"] Beth, First off, I am of the same mind as you in terms of if a potential "diagnosis" was picked up on screening. Things turn out how they're supposed to, even if we don't always get it. I had the blood test that was supposed to pick up twins and Downs' syndrome back in the dark ages. Everything was "normal". When I got kidney stones at 21 weeks and was found to be in pre-term labor, the ultrasound tech thought he'd take a peek at my baby while he was checking out the kidneys. Imagine the shock when he said there were 2 babies! ;) So... I'm not a huge believer in absolute accuracy of testing. on the other hand, they are doing some amazing things now with kiddos who have neural tube defects (i.e. in-utero surgery to close the defect prior to birth). I have to admit, if I had the ability to "fix" a problem and possibly prevent a physical disability, I would go for it. While that kind of flies in the face of "things turn out how they're supposed to", somehow ... it makes sense to me, I guess because maybe *because* of how things turned out with Boo, even though his situation wasn't preventable at the time. Since the NT is noninvasive, I'd do it. At the very least, it would give you and the doctor the opportunity to prepare if there is the possibility of a problem, rather than having all heck break lose at delivery, you know? But if the stress of knowing there might be a problem (again, I really took pregnancy related tests with a grain of salt after the twins) is going to cause greater harm... I think it's perfectly reasonable not to do it, too. How's that for an on-the-fence answer? I guess, as with all things related to motherhood, my strongest vote would be to follow your heart. You will make the right choice for you and the wee one. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
General Discussions
The Watercooler
Need some opinions - Preggo Ques!
Top