I am wondering how many ultrasounds your dr has or will do throughout your pregnancy? I had one at 16.5 weeks at the genetic counselor and found out we are having a girl. My dr usually does one at 20-22 wks but since I had one at 16 says there is no need to do one. Last week I asked when she will do the next one and she says unless something is wrong she will not send me for an ultrasound ... I always thought they did at least 2 - I want the reassurance everything is okay and hoped for a 2nd opinion on the gender.
Where are you from? Over here in the UK women get 2 scans..one at 12 weeks and one at 20 weeks. That's the norm from my understanding. Maybe if you speak to your doctor he'll schedule another scan for you.
I think it depends on your doctor. I think it also depends on how your pregnancy is going, and how your insurance plan is.
I think my doctor does 3:
1 very early on to confirm & see the pregnancy.
1 at 20 weeks.
1 at 34 weeks.
My insurance plan only expects 2, but they are flexible.
So far I've had 4 sonograms, and I'm only at 25 weeks. 2 early on to find the pregnancy (they couldn't find it for a while), 1 while I had my amnio, and 1 at 20 weeks. My insurance ok'd the extra ones because there were medical reasons to do them.
I live in the USA and my doctor will only do one ultra sound. Ours was scheduled around 20 weeks but because my AFP results were low they scheduled a Level II ultrasound at the hopsital. Now they won't give me another one, I know how you feel, almost robbed of the experience to see your baby. I had a vcr tape ready and everything but instead was in so much stress and so scared something was wrong with her that I just sat still so the doctor could measure her little bones and make sure she was ok.
I guess that's just how insurance works here, it sucks but what can you do.
I had several with my 1st pregancy! I had 2 at RE to confirm pregnancy, the first time I was not as far along as we thought so we had to wait a week and do another to see the heartbeat so he could release me to the OBGYN. Then I had one at 12 weeks at OBGYN, then I had one at 19 weeks found out sex, and the noticed I had a low lying placenta so they sch another at 26 wks to check to see if placenta moved as uterous grew, it hadn't so I had another at 34 wks to see the location of placenta, they then scheduled my C section.
But I think in the U.S. it depends on the Dr. but normally its one around 20 weeks. Or 2, one in the beginning between 8 to 12 wks and again around 20 weeks.
Kaleb 6/23/04 aftr TTC 4yrs
Miscarried 12/31/04 @ 6wk 5 days
It's a GIRL EDD Jan 12, 2006
Last edited by Kaleb's Mom 04; 05-27-2005 at 09:13 AM.
The only place they do them around here is the University Hopsital and they cost around $300-$400 which right now is way too much. We just bought a new house and need to buy furniture for it cause it's huge! We figure we will need the space once the inlaws arrive!
But thanks for the suggestion!
Just something you all might want to know...I saw a study where babies that had 5 ultrasounds during the pregnancy tended to have a much lower weight at birth than babies than only had 1. I also saw a study where babies than had 2 or 3 ultrasounds (I forget which) were much more likely to be left handed than babies than had either 1 or none (I forget which again). The authors of the study speculated that the ultrasounds caused mild brain damage, causing more babies to be left-handed than normal.
Just something to be aware of if you are having or contemplating having multiple ultrasounds.
Are you suggesting that left-handed people are mildly brain damaged?! I may be reading your post wrong but that's what it sounds like to me. I know quite a few people that are left-handed and none of them are brain damaged. Some of us require more scans than other women for some reason or another (in my case epilepsy/severe sickness in pregnancy..my OB wants to check the growth of my baby) and if there was any chance of the sonogram damaging the baby I'm sure the doctor would point that out. He/she would be legally/ethically required to.
In all of the literature I have read it's always been pointed out that there is no proof at all that sonograms harm the baby. I was given a pamphlet telling me that right before my first scan.
By the way, my SIL has two children (a boy and a girl) who are both left-handed and both of them are extremely bright.
I have already had one at 8w3d due to bleeding and spotting where I found out I was having twins. My next visit is at 11w the doc said I will be getting U/S frequently to monitor both the babies. After 16w I will get an U/S every two weeks. If I was not having twins I probably would of only had 2 the whole pregnancy unless there were problems.
I am also left-handed as well as my SD, Mom. Acutally left-handed people use more of both sides of the brain than right-handed if you want to get technical. I highly doubt being left-handed is a problem.
Last edited by Shadyfeline; 05-27-2005 at 11:31 AM.
I live in the US, and my doctor prefers to do one at 20 weeks--ONLY if it is a low-risk pregnancy.
I had my first one done at 20 weeks, where the doctor noticed that the placenta was lying slightly low. She said she thought it was due to the baby being in a breech position.
I requested another one, which I am going to have in two weeks, for the 32nd week mark. I don't think she would have offered to do one, but I want to make sure the placenta has pulled up since the baby went head down.
Also, there are cases, where they do an ultrasound 1-2 days before your due date, to confirm the fetal weight, and other things.
Gosh I have probably had 12 or more ultrasounds. There is NO evidence at all that ultrasounds are dangerous at all. All they are are soundwaves. Just normal old soundwaves. Sometimes they make the baby mad, my guy gets so upset. The Doppler that they use to check the heart beat uses the exact same technology as an ultrasound, just there is no pic attached to it. Soundwaves there also. There is no radiation involved, or anything invasisve to the baby.
MMShell, check out places like FetalFotos, or something like that we had a 4-d done for 189. Insurane will pay depending on how the dr codes the ultrasound. i, like tiggergirl, have problems that require frequent monitoring of weight and such.
No, I was not intending to say that left-handed people are brain damaged. Obviously the vast majority of left-handed people are not brain damaged. Read the first post in quotes below for an explanation of this.
There are a couple of problems with the assumption that your doctor would tell you if there was anything indicating that ultrasound wasn't completely safe. 1. your doctor may not be aware of any of these studies indicating possible risks of ultrasounds. 2. X-rays, general anesthesia in labor, gaining no more than 15 pounds in pregnancy, and many other things were widely recommended by doctors for many years, but they were all eventually proven unsafe. So just because something is widely recommended by doctors as safe today doesn't necessarily mean it is safe. And there are doctors out there today who will not do ultrasounds except for medical reasons. "The ACOG (American College of Gynecology" does NOT recommend routine ultrasounds (or the routine use of dopplers or external fetal monitoring, i.e., EFM) during the course of healthy, low risk pregnancies."
I'm not suggesting that if there are medical reasons for you to have multiple scans, you shouldn't get them done. I am suggesting than you do a little research FOR YOURSELF before getting multiple scans done just because you want to see the baby. There is no definite evidence that ultrasounds ARE unsafe, however, there is evidence indicating that they MAY BE unsafe for some babies. Unfortunately I can't post any links on this board, but I'll post a couple of things from some of the stuff I've found.
"Kieler's team studied a group of Swedish men born between 1973 and 1978. Nearly 7000 had received ultrasonic scans in the womb, while 170,000 had not. Kieler found that of the men born between 1976 and 1978 who had ultrasonic scans in the womb, 32 per cent more than expected were left-handed. In an average population, around nine per cent of men are left-handed.
The results suggest that some men who genetically would have been expected to be born right-handed had actually grown up to be left-handed. Kieler says this could be due to a disruption of their brain development in the womb: "It's commonly known among neuropsychiatrists that right-handed people can become left-handed by slight damage to the brain."
"A study of over 1400 women in Perth, Western Australia compared pregnant mothers who had ultrasound only once during gestation with mothers who had five monthly ultrasounds from 18 weeks to 38 weeks. They found significantly higher intrauterine growth restriction in the intensive ultrasound group. These mothers gave birth to lower weight babies.
The researchers concluded that prenatal ultrasound imaging and Doppler flow exams should be restricted to clinically necessary situations. "
"Delayed speech is not a pathological or organic syndrome but developmentally defined symptom complex. Clinicians have noted an increased incidence of delayed speech in pediatric patients.
This is a matched-case control study of 72 children 2 to 8 years old presenting with delayed speech of unknown cause. The children were measured for articulation, language comprehension, language production, meta-linguistic skills, and verbal memory. When checked for ultrasound exposure, the speech-delayed children were about twice as likely to have been exposed to ultrasound than the matched controls. "
"A large randomised controlled trial from Helsinki (Saari-Kemppainen et al., 1990) randomly divided over 9,000 women into a group who were scanned at sixteen to twenty weeks compared with those who were not. It revealed twenty miscarriages after sixteen to twenty weeks in the screened group and none in the controls."
"The first evidence we saw of possible damage to humans came in 1984 when American obstetricians published a follow-up study of children, aged seven to twelve years born in three different hospitals in Florida and Denver, who had been exposed to ultrasound in the womb (Stark et al., 1984). Compared with a control group of children who had not been exposed they were more likely to have dyslexia and to have been admitted to hospital during their childhood, but no other differences were found."
Caedmyn, I see where you are going with this, and it is very interesting. I'm thinking back to me and my 3 brothers. My older brother (30) and I (23) didn't have ultrasounds done before birth. They just weren't used as much unless there was a problem during the pregnancy. However, my 2 younger brothers 18 and 16 had ultrasounds done. They are both very intelligent (I have to say that, they're my brothers, LOL) but the 18 year old had low birth weight and problems with seizures when he ws born until about 4 or 5 and my 16 yr old brother had horrible speech problems growing up. He's much better now, but still speaks differently. This could just have been coincidence or problems that could not be avoided. Some children are born with different problems, doesn't necessarily mean there was an outside influence. Both brothers are doing very well in school, both right-handed, and have excelled in sports and curricullum.
You can blame the problems they had on any outside source, unfortunately studies can't pinpoint the actual culprit. Maybe the parents smoked, drank in their pregnancies, or who knows, maybe those microwaves and computers are not safe after all! My point is that unless these studies are done in a more controlled enviroment and more realistically, we won't really know the true results. I say this because the one study regarding women who had 5 monthly ultrasounds from 18-38 weeks is unrealistic. I'm sure we will all agree that unless there are problems in the pregnancy, 5 ultrasounds from 18-38wks is unrealistic and no necessary. How many women do you know have 5 u/s from 18-38wks? None here.
Also, the following study isn't at all controlled. To me, its just a hypothesis by the researcher or scientist. Look at this statement:
"When checked for ultrasound exposure, the speech-delayed children were about twice as likely to have been exposed to ultrasound than the matched controls. "
Where did he get this from? There is nothing in the statement that leads me to believe that he knew for a fact that the children were exposed to multiple ultrasounds in the womb.
Do these studies prove ultrasound is unsafe...no. But it seems to me, that since most pregnant women are willing to avoid all sorts of things that MIGHT harm the baby, they ought to take a closer look at other things that might harm the baby, especially if those things are not really necessary.
As for as stating that no one has 5 ultrasounds between 18-38 weeks, well, one poster on this thread stated that she has had 12 ultrasounds!, so I imagine she does or will fit into that category. Another stated that she would be having ultrasounds every 2 weeks after 16 weeks, so she will fit into that category as well. I have a friend who said that she had ultrasounds at every doctor's visit with one of her pregnancies.
"When checked for ultrasound exposure, the speech-delayed children were about twice as likely to have been exposed to ultrasound than the matched controls. " It stated in the text that 60-some percent of the speech-delayed children were exposed to ultrasound, as opposed to 32% of the controls. For the sake of brevity, I didn't post the entire text of any of these.
I am not suggesting that no one have ultrasounds. I am merely suggesting that women take the time to research this so they can make an informed decision.