Ultrasounds and retarded fetal growth

LouLou

New member
Great diaglogue everyone. Good points and it's important to realize these are extreme views on the subject. Obviously there are a majority of people that don't see a problem with u/s's or we'd here about this more often. I for one didn't look into it until I 1) saw how adament my MFM group is about doing many. and 2) when a mother I know told me she spotted after each u/s...still not sure what that was all about.

Here's some background on why my group suggests u/s in cf mom's so often. Keep in mind I go to HUP which is considered a top hospital in America. Albeit in a state with one of the highest sue rates. Mother's with cf can compromise the growth of their babies from two aspects: 02 deprivation and lack of proper nutrition. At all growth checks (through u/s) my baby has been approx. in the 50 percentile (53rd at 26 weeks, 43rd at 32 weeks) which is great. The want to continue to monitor his growth to ensure he doesn't drop below the 10 percentile. If he did they would suggest non stress testing where they can see if it is 1) and O2 problem 2) a nutrition problem or 3) just a small baby. If it was 1 or 2 they would suggest either a c-section or induction depending how far along the pregnancy was. The thought is that they could care for the baby better than the human body if problem 1 or 2 was to arise.

Flash forward to me, I'm 5'3" started at 127 lbs. and was 149.5 lbs. on Friday at 32 weeks. 22.5 lbs. - my fundus height is growing always within normal range and I am monitoring fetal kick counts which are normal everyday (at least 10 counts in a 2 hr. period) and his heartbeat has always been normal as well. All of these things make me feel it is unnecessary to do any further u/s. That's my personal opinion and my right.

At 36 weeks (when my next u/s would be if I wasn't declining it), the margin of error is plus/minus 1 lb. I feel it's a slippery slope in which an unnecessary intervention might happen.

I'm glad I've had the close watch but enough is enough. If I'm not having an problems why pursue testing that is potentially dangerous.

Edited to add: my O2 sats were 98 on Friday. Plenty of oxygen for the baby I would think.
 

wanderlost

New member
I think hospitals are good for many things. Obviously you want the best care in the face of a medical emergency. Though top hospitals are often only considered the top because they have the most up-to-date technology, or, they paid for their ranking (they do do this). So while your med team may be the best in the country it still only means they are the best using a medical model of care. When you look more holisitically (as you are) you can see exactly why further u/s are not needed. But if you only look at CF MOM then you'd think not enough testing was being done, kwm?

I have found I have had to fight the Cf thing many times in my life. "Yes, I have CF, but...." and I have had to go on to explain why just going by a text book case of Cf does not apply to me and my situation.

I am still hoping your baby comes on his due date. July 13th is a very auspicious day <img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif" border="0">
 

wanderlost

New member
I think hospitals are good for many things. Obviously you want the best care in the face of a medical emergency. Though top hospitals are often only considered the top because they have the most up-to-date technology, or, they paid for their ranking (they do do this). So while your med team may be the best in the country it still only means they are the best using a medical model of care. When you look more holisitically (as you are) you can see exactly why further u/s are not needed. But if you only look at CF MOM then you'd think not enough testing was being done, kwm?

I have found I have had to fight the Cf thing many times in my life. "Yes, I have CF, but...." and I have had to go on to explain why just going by a text book case of Cf does not apply to me and my situation.

I am still hoping your baby comes on his due date. July 13th is a very auspicious day <img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif" border="0">
 

wanderlost

New member
I think hospitals are good for many things. Obviously you want the best care in the face of a medical emergency. Though top hospitals are often only considered the top because they have the most up-to-date technology, or, they paid for their ranking (they do do this). So while your med team may be the best in the country it still only means they are the best using a medical model of care. When you look more holisitically (as you are) you can see exactly why further u/s are not needed. But if you only look at CF MOM then you'd think not enough testing was being done, kwm?

I have found I have had to fight the Cf thing many times in my life. "Yes, I have CF, but...." and I have had to go on to explain why just going by a text book case of Cf does not apply to me and my situation.

I am still hoping your baby comes on his due date. July 13th is a very auspicious day <img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif" border="0">
 

JazzysMom

New member
I think there is more to the picture then the dangers of Ultrasounds. Like anything else with risks when some are affected and some are not, I would almost think that those who are affected have a pre disposition of some sort which makes them more prone. I had at least 7 ultrasounds (only 1 was internal and that was very early on) while pregnant. Most of these were at my husbands request & my OB was "charmed" by him that she actually did it in her office on her own time. Jazmine was early (because of my hemoptysis), but definitely would have been average weight. She never had growth or speech delays. If anything she was always ahead for her age. Unless there are other problems that can present themselves she definitely is unaffected. I commend those who dont want to take that risk and refuse anything over & above what is needed for the well being of the mom & baby. Its not always easy to stand your ground.
 

JazzysMom

New member
I think there is more to the picture then the dangers of Ultrasounds. Like anything else with risks when some are affected and some are not, I would almost think that those who are affected have a pre disposition of some sort which makes them more prone. I had at least 7 ultrasounds (only 1 was internal and that was very early on) while pregnant. Most of these were at my husbands request & my OB was "charmed" by him that she actually did it in her office on her own time. Jazmine was early (because of my hemoptysis), but definitely would have been average weight. She never had growth or speech delays. If anything she was always ahead for her age. Unless there are other problems that can present themselves she definitely is unaffected. I commend those who dont want to take that risk and refuse anything over & above what is needed for the well being of the mom & baby. Its not always easy to stand your ground.
 

JazzysMom

New member
I think there is more to the picture then the dangers of Ultrasounds. Like anything else with risks when some are affected and some are not, I would almost think that those who are affected have a pre disposition of some sort which makes them more prone. I had at least 7 ultrasounds (only 1 was internal and that was very early on) while pregnant. Most of these were at my husbands request & my OB was "charmed" by him that she actually did it in her office on her own time. Jazmine was early (because of my hemoptysis), but definitely would have been average weight. She never had growth or speech delays. If anything she was always ahead for her age. Unless there are other problems that can present themselves she definitely is unaffected. I commend those who dont want to take that risk and refuse anything over & above what is needed for the well being of the mom & baby. Its not always easy to stand your ground.
 
Top