wanderlost
New member
Odds of a Successful Pregnancy
i've fallen a bit behind in this conversation - but I think Caroline summed up a lot of what I would have said here:
<i>There is a lot of debate and unknowns regarding miscarriages. Sure some women w/ CF who get pregnant will miscarry due to their nutritional status or whatnot. But why discourage a healthy woman with good nutrition and pulmonary function from getting pregnant? I just don't see it. All the studies I've read (and I've read lots) say that pregnancy in healthy CF women can be successful and has no bearing on their decline due to CF. Miscarriages can happen to anyone for a variety of reasons and most of them I'm willing to bet are not only found in CF women. </i>
<i>Any rational CF woman looking to get pregnant would take a look at the drugs she's taking to make sure they're compatible with pregnancy. If she's taking NSAIDs then she'll most likely find an alternative to take for the duration of the pregnancy. Can you tell me what study you've read or what data you're using to come up with your assertion that "CF women are not healthy enough to sustain a pregnancy"??? I'm very curious and I want to read it for myself. </i>
I do agree with Lauren in some aspects though: if you're not in good health to begin with you shouldn't have a baby. In the 2 years I have been on this site I have seen a women pop in from time to time saying (I am exaggerating a bit here): my PFTS are in the 30s, I have PA, MRSA, B. Cepacia, CFRD, and I weigh 80 pounds - but I want ot have a baby! Well, no, no one would encourage that woman to get pregnant - but, for many other women who are in relatively good health with stable PFTS and a reliable history - there seems to reason not to encourage them if they already have the desire to have a baby. And, being the boob-nazi that I am, I do think that if you arten't healthy enough to breastfeed that baby after you have it because of your weight or certain unsafe meds that you can't be off of - well, that should factor in too - I mean why do this baby thing if you cannot give it 100%?? The after care is just as importnant as the pregnancy. I bet the hypothetical woman I listed above might be able to carry a baby to term, but what would be the aftermath for her as opposed to a woman like myself with PFTS in the 70s, stable weight, not on a host of abx or other meds, etc.? and that's not to say that I don't realize that my own health could easily slip, but only that so far, through two pregnancies and eight years of motherhood and nearly a year of breastfeeding, it has not yet.
So, as Emily said, you can't paint the picture 100% either way - it's too gray.
I am pretty sure my stats are NOT registered with the CFF - and I have 2 kids, so factor people like me into the mix, plus I have had a miscarriage, completely unrelated to CF.
i've fallen a bit behind in this conversation - but I think Caroline summed up a lot of what I would have said here:
<i>There is a lot of debate and unknowns regarding miscarriages. Sure some women w/ CF who get pregnant will miscarry due to their nutritional status or whatnot. But why discourage a healthy woman with good nutrition and pulmonary function from getting pregnant? I just don't see it. All the studies I've read (and I've read lots) say that pregnancy in healthy CF women can be successful and has no bearing on their decline due to CF. Miscarriages can happen to anyone for a variety of reasons and most of them I'm willing to bet are not only found in CF women. </i>
<i>Any rational CF woman looking to get pregnant would take a look at the drugs she's taking to make sure they're compatible with pregnancy. If she's taking NSAIDs then she'll most likely find an alternative to take for the duration of the pregnancy. Can you tell me what study you've read or what data you're using to come up with your assertion that "CF women are not healthy enough to sustain a pregnancy"??? I'm very curious and I want to read it for myself. </i>
I do agree with Lauren in some aspects though: if you're not in good health to begin with you shouldn't have a baby. In the 2 years I have been on this site I have seen a women pop in from time to time saying (I am exaggerating a bit here): my PFTS are in the 30s, I have PA, MRSA, B. Cepacia, CFRD, and I weigh 80 pounds - but I want ot have a baby! Well, no, no one would encourage that woman to get pregnant - but, for many other women who are in relatively good health with stable PFTS and a reliable history - there seems to reason not to encourage them if they already have the desire to have a baby. And, being the boob-nazi that I am, I do think that if you arten't healthy enough to breastfeed that baby after you have it because of your weight or certain unsafe meds that you can't be off of - well, that should factor in too - I mean why do this baby thing if you cannot give it 100%?? The after care is just as importnant as the pregnancy. I bet the hypothetical woman I listed above might be able to carry a baby to term, but what would be the aftermath for her as opposed to a woman like myself with PFTS in the 70s, stable weight, not on a host of abx or other meds, etc.? and that's not to say that I don't realize that my own health could easily slip, but only that so far, through two pregnancies and eight years of motherhood and nearly a year of breastfeeding, it has not yet.
So, as Emily said, you can't paint the picture 100% either way - it's too gray.
I am pretty sure my stats are NOT registered with the CFF - and I have 2 kids, so factor people like me into the mix, plus I have had a miscarriage, completely unrelated to CF.