freakin' doctors are trying to break my head
My obstetrician called me yesterday, but i missed the call and they left me this message saying ¨please contact us tomorrow morning at 9 oclock about your blood test results¨. So I was all wound up because the doctor told me that if they didn't call that would mean everything was fine, but if they did call that would mean that there was a risk that the baby had a genetic problem.
So i went in there and they told me that the results of my hormone levels were slightly abnormal, and then they explained to me that of women who had the same results as me and are of the same race and age group, 1 out of 210 gave birth to a baby with down's syndrome. She said I should consider doing an amniocentisis.
1 out of 210 chance of down's syndrome. If you look at that the other way, isn't that like saying you have more than 99.5% chance that your baby doesn't have down's syndrome? Or am I missing something here? Why should i have an invasive procedure with risks (however minimal) of loosing my baby to discount the 0.5% possibility that it may have down's syndrome?
I'm kind of pissed that they even bothered me with this information.
DH says it might be worth the bother because then we would know for sure that the baby doesn't have any genetic abnormalities and we would also know for sure the sex of the baby. But I don't think I want to do it, because even if the tests came back positive for down's I wouldn't abort anyway- and it's not like we would have to buy special stuff or line up special medical equipment to prepare for it.
What do you all think?
Another big question. I'm trying to decide whether to have the baby at home or at hospital. If I have the baby at hospital social security pays for everything, but if i have the baby at home I have to pay the midwife 900-1500.
Speaking with the midwife at the hospital (I have a doctor and a midwife on my case and my visits alternate between them.) She says that 2 of the nurse midwives who work there also do home births, and that another of them has done home births in the past- but has stopped to have more free time for her kids. She says for that reason our hospital is one of the most liberal hospitals in terms of birthing policies in all of spain, with extremely low levels of interventions.
For example it is written hospital policy that women can be in any position they want during expulsion, including standing, and that birthing chairs are available. Most births are handled by midwives and doctors are usually only called in case of emergencies and or shortage of midwives (if there are alot of ladies giving birth at the same time). Other women I know who have given birth at this hospital were very happy with them, and said that they and their birth plans were respected, but ladies that gave birth at home were also really satisfied.
When I have the baby I'll get a government assistance of 2,500 euros. Everybody gets it when they have a baby (as long as they're legal residents). Most of the midwives who do home births will let you make a small down payment and then finish paying the birth when you get that money, so I wouldn't be breaking my bank to have the baby at home. But if I had the baby at hospital I could use that money for other things, like finishing up the remodeling at our place, and taking the baby to visit the states so that my friends and family can admire him or her.
If I had the baby at home I could listen to any music i wanted, as loud as I wanted, but I don't think they would let me crank it up at the hospital.
Tigerfish Mama
- motormouth's blog
- Login or register to post comments
I'm hearing a "no" from you loud and clear on the amniocentisis, so stick with your gut, make that decision official, and that will be one less thing to think about. And yes, those odds are totally in your favor. As for the hospital/home birth, well, it's possible to have an awesome birth either place. Both choices are equally valid. When do you have to decide?
it sounds like you 100% don't wish to have an amnio, so don't question your judgement on it. you know what the right thing is!
and this is totally my own opinion, but if i could save a significant amount of money with the hospital birth and i knew the experience would still be an empowering and independent one with as little/much intervention as i wanted, i'd personally do that. as far as the music thing, the only time i wanted to listen to any music was during the early stages of labor, during the couple hours i was at home before we left for the hospital. once i got to the hospital everything moved really quickly and music never even crossed my mind, and would have probably even annoyed me. everyone's experience is totally diefferent though, so if for you having loud music is what you would need to feel comfortable and inspired then by all means-- take that into consideration!
good luck figuring it all out!
I don't know how far along you are, but can't they do one of those really detailed ultrasounds first? They can measure the neck and head, which gives them a fairly good hypothesis. I remember when I was pregnant with Indy, I took that stupid test. They told me it was positive for Downs, they didn't mention that it was a 90% false positive rate. They did the regular ultrasound and then another more detailed one, at a specialists, and their best guess was that she was fine, after all was checked out. I still worried, but she came out safe and sound. BASTARDS.
As for where to have the baby... no amount of money can replace your memories. You know this. However, with both of my hospital births, I had a birth plan I stuck to and someone to advocate for me. Both hospitals let me bring in my birthin' music cd's. It's all about where you'll be most comfortable. Good luck!
"Life may not be the party we hoped for but while we're here we might as well dance".- Maya Angelou
I'm just not gonna let the man get me down. I know this baby is fine. They'll do a really detailed ultrasound at the end of the month and they'll tell me ¨looks great¨, and I'll say hell yeah.
Still on the fence about the birth place.
Yeah, I'm right with you on the amnio. Like you said, it really wouldn't make a huge difference preparation wise either way. I suppose it means you'd have more time to emotionally prepare if the test was positive. But I don't know, I almost think I'd prefer to not dwell on it and just welcome the babe no matter what. I almost think it would be easier to fully embrace something like that after you've already met your babe. That's just me, though.
As for the birth place, honestly, it sounds like you have a good chance of having a really good experience either place. I suppose the only question is the money. And while the lovey dovey from the heart response would be that money shouldn't play into the decision, the logical practical part knows it does. And I don't think that's wrong. Especially if you've done your research and the hospital has great reviews and you feel like you'd be comfortable there as well. I think no matter what you choose you'll have the same chances of having a lovely birth.
I wouldn't do the amnio either, for the same reasons you don't want to.
I say have the hospital birth and save the money and don't worry about not being able to crank your music...when I was in labor I had a mix tape with me and my mom was there very dutifully turning it over every time it got to the end and I did not hear ONE LICK of music. Being in labor is like being on another planet, mentally.
I was just saying to vkitty that I made this lovely playlist for myself for labor. And then never listened to any of it! Not a single song. So you just never know.
One suggestion I have if you go with the hospital birth - stay at home for as long as you can. It's so much more comfortable without anyone checking your blood pressure, asking you if you want to be checked vaginally, etc. Of course, this might be an argument for home birth!!! 
But even if you go with hospital, you can still be at home for much of your labor.
Find ecstasy in life; the mere sense of living is joy enough. -- Emily Dickinson
You want to do what you think is right and what matters to you, and if other people don't like it, as my father would have said, they can go fuck themselves. -- Amy Bloom
I hate that screening test and its false positives. Do you have the option of doing a nuchal translucency test? It is much less invasive than an amnio. And, what would you do if it was positive for Down Syndrome? You should discuss what the outcomes of a test will lead to before taking a test.
As for the midwifery home birth thing, good luck. The decision is difficult and up to you. I wish it wasn't such a financial consideration.
Sunflower the unflower
but I'm supporting amnio. With my first, I had the funky false positive that you did, went with the amnio, all was fine. With my 2nd, I skipped right ahead to the ultra-cool ultrasound (nuchal translucency test, I believe is the correct term), that was okay, had an amnio just in case and all is well. Also a big fan of hospital births. I know it sounds conservative but me being comfortable with the process was important and recognizing that I had a tremendous fear of birth complications made me WANT a darned hospital AND an amnio (because, unlike you, I might have been swayed toward an abortion by the results....amnio detects much more than just Downs). So while I'm a crunchy, vegetarian, tree-hugging, breastfeeding hippie mama, I like my medicine very conventional. I'm sure you and the bean will be A-okay no matter how you do things...just wanted to weigh in on the other side.
Navigation
Who's online
Who's New
- BeachBunny
- gayle.mallinger
- Mamapocket
- mjcwriter
- addie smith
or I run the risk that all the midwives in my area will be booked up.