PreNatal Screening for abnormalities in baby?

  • Thread starter Thread starter FullOfThought
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
F

FullOfThought

Guest
My husband and I decided that we weren’t going to have any invasive testing done while I am pregnant that even has a slight chance of a miscarriage, we’re in our mid 20’s with no known genetic illnesses on either side of our family, and so for us the risk of a miscarriage hugely outweighs the likelihood of our child having a genetic illness.

However, we were not expecting the midwife to offer us a blood test that screen hormones and enzyme levels in MY blood for indicators of Down Syndrome, Edwards Syndrome and neural tube defects such as Spina Bifida. The test has no risk of miscarriage, has to be done on our next appointment if we choose to have it done.

We cannot decide if we want it done, the fear of getting a positive and having to deal with the emotions and stress seems huge, but on the other hand the knowledge and time we would have to prepare ourselves if anything about our baby is different than expected also seems benefical…and then what if we get a false positive!

I was wondering if anybody has had any experience with these or similar tests, or if anybody wishes they had known their baby had special needs before he or she was born?
Thank you in advance!
 
I had them done each time and will again. You should be aware, though, because of your concern over miscarriage, that if the tests show a chance that your baby may have any of these things that it is an indication that a more invasive test might be appropriate. Ultrasound and CVS are the next two tests, if memory serves me right. So you would have another decision to make at that time. But each step is always YOUR decision, not the OB’s. You decide how little or how much you need to know and how far you are willing to go with testing to find out. There is nothing unethical or immoral about these tests. And you are right that armed with foreknowledge can help you to prepare if tests should indicate a problem. On the other hand, waiting to see your newborn baby and making some quick decisions on that day is fine too. It is up to YOU. 🙂

Edited to add: I have not had a special needs child or any indication a CVS might be important. And you mentioned false positives, which do happen. I was concerned about that, too, but then never had any positive test results.
 
Downs and neural tube defects show up on sonagrams, too.

An indication of a problem on one test does indeed indicate additional testing. Not because you would want to terminate, but because you would want to prepare.

My first son was born with a neural tube defect. We did not have the Alpha Fetoprotein test, but found out during the Sonogram from Hell. Are we glad we knew then? Yes. We had time to prepare, we were at the right hospital, we made arrangements for how he would be baptized. We did have an amnio, which has risks.

I think that sometimes Catholics take the stand that they don’t want to know about defects because they wouldn’t terminate the pregnancy. That’s great, but would you rather find out in the delivery room, or sooner so you can be mentally prepared?
 
More and more can be done for children with such problems even before they are born, during childbirth and immediately after, I feel it is better to know, if it is safe. Early intervention programs are very important.

Just find a doctor who is strongly pro-life, even in such cases.
I am not a parent or a doctor, but I work with grown ups with disabilities and things you sometimes hear are horrible, so it is important to have a doctor who will support you and make sure you get all the information you need.
 
No kids here but I believe that in the case of spina bifida it is better not to go into labour because contractions are bad for the babies so it is good to know.
 
We, with trepidation, decided to do the testing this time. We did it knowing we might be able to prepare and to provide a better outcome if there were a problem.

My only fear was that they would find something and then pressure us to terminate. I wonder if anyone has had that experience?
 
papaececi said:
We, with trepidation, decided to do the testing this time. We did it knowing we might be able to prepare and to provide a better outcome if there were a problem.

My only fear was that they would find something and then pressure us to terminate. I wonder if anyone has had that experience?
Click to expand...
This was a concern of ours too, but I don’t think any amount of pressure could make us to that to our baby.

Do you mind if I ask if you had the tests done yet and if so how long the results take to get back?
 
Personally I think as long as a test does not carry any risk of provoking a miscarriage it is a good idea.

If there are any problems, lots can be done during pregnancy and at birth to improve the outcome for the child and God forbid there being a problem. But if there is it’s best to prepare as far as you can.
 
I’m almost 50; I imagine there are more tests now than when I was having babies.

Our feeling was, since we were low risk, we were not interested in any tests. The majority of babies are fine; we went on the assumption ours would be in the majority.

Pray and do what you think is best.
 
I was a high risk pregnancy so I wasn’t given a choice, but I’m glad we did all the testing necessary…knowing in advance if anything is going to be an issue will help you to prepare. Like another poster said, hard labor can be an issue for some neural tube babies so a scheduled c-section is better. also, you can get all of the information about what you’re facing ahead of time too.

i think you made the best decision. good luck with your new miracle!
 
FullOfThought said:
This was a concern of ours too, but I don’t think any amount of pressure could make us to that to our baby.

Do you mind if I ask if you had the tests done yet and if so how long the results take to get back?
Click to expand...
We got the result of the nuchal translucency ultrasound immediately. The blood tests (there were 2 four weeks apart) took a week.
 
SusanneT said:
Personally I think as long as a test does not carry any risk of provoking a miscarriage it is a good idea.

If there are any problems, lots can be done during pregnancy and at birth to improve the outcome for the child and God forbid there being a problem. But if there is it’s best to prepare as far as you can.
Click to expand...
I agree with this to a certain extent. I’m sure there are hundreds of tests that can be done, and all of those can add up economically. We did the safe tests with our first child as suggested by our OB who knew that termination was not an option. With our other children some of the tests weren’t as relevant because statistically there was a lot lower chance, etc. and so I would pretty much ask my OB if she thought the test results would make any difference in the prenatal care, and if it didn’t, we wouldn’t do the test. It would be nice to be ready, but I am not going to spend hundreds of dollars doing all the tests out there just in case if it isn’t something that would somehow benefit my child. If we are blessed again, I will play it by ear.
 
If you get a false positive, it will be one of many you will get as a parent. We are creatures looking for anything that might threaten our babies, and so of course we will occasionally see a problem down the road that never materializes. Figure on that happening.

We got the tests that did not pose a threat to the baby. Sometimes, something turns up that you can do something about or that you will handle better with preparation. You have more time to educate yourself before a baby arrives and subjects you to sleep deprivation!
 
Pre-natal testing can get a bad rap because of the mistaken assumption that everyone does it to decide whether or not to terminate. The fact is that the test itself is not bad. It is how one handles the information that can be good or bad. I believe in pre-natal testing because it can give the parents time to prepare, seek treatment options, and sometimes even treat the condition to make the baby healthier before the baby is born!

Remember to just weigh the pros and cons of each test to decide if it is more likely to help the baby in the long run or not. If your baby has a health problem the early notification may make you better able to care for him or her.
 
We have not done any with our first two children due to my age, and the fact that NEITHER of our families have ANY known genetic diseases.

As I am getting older, we will be doing the more non-invasive tests once I’m past 30. Depending on the results of those, if they indicate something that could be fixed while in utero, etc, we may go forward with them.

I would want to be able to mentally prepare myself if I were to have a disabled child.
 
Aggies08 said:
We have not done any with our first two children due to my age, and the fact that NEITHER of our families have ANY known genetic diseases.

As I am getting older, we will be doing the more non-invasive tests once I’m past 30. Depending on the results of those, if they indicate something that could be fixed while in utero, etc, we may go forward with them.

I would want to be able to mentally prepare myself if I were to have a disabled child.
Click to expand...
That’s how I felt as we don’t have any genetic diseases either however these tests are testing for illnesses not caused by genetic history but by developmental mutations of genes. They can happen to anyone randomly. Mutations happen all the time but most have no effect, while these specifically do make a difference in a child’s development. Mutations are more likely the older the mother but still can happen to anyone!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top