![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Jan. 5th, 2010
Ultra Sound
Jan. 5th, 2010 10:50 pmThe icon is actually Linnea's scan, which was at 20 weeks or so. But today's scan went well, and the baby held the same pose, cupped hand up to mouth with fingers clearly visible, nose and mouth visible with a careful look. 13 weeks now.
We went to the scan and the technician asked chattily what we were hoping for; I said "A skull." So she first said "there's the skull, and the spine, they're fine," and I was able to look at the screen. She then showed us all the bits of the anatomy - the heart, both sides of the brain, the abdomen, feet and hands. She exclaimed "Oh that's cute!" when the baby sucked its thumb.
Rob feels that the whole thing is more real now and I have alleviated a big worry, which I knew was largely unfounded but still worried about.
Then there was the nonsense about the downs screening. "You want the combined screening?" "No, I want the nuchal fold screening." "OK."
About three people said that, but nonetheless I was directed, after the nuchal fold measurements were taken, to go and get blood drawn. So I did, and then the care assistant said "We need to have your weight."
I said "No, you don't, you just prefer to for your systems."
She had to go up the food chain to find someone who could officially accept that we declined the combined test and only wanted the nuchal fold one. But we managed it, and she understood that our declining the standardised testing was something the system ought to be able to cope with and just didn't because it's so unusual.
It's not the test I object to, though; it's the weighing. They weigh one once and use that measurement. They'd have weighed me at 5 weeks pregnant - only a few days after missing a period - wearing my light shoes, and used that. Or today they'd have weighed me wearing my hiking boots, two layers of winter underwear, many jumpers etc, at 13 weeks pregnant and being significantly larger. They would treat both of those weights as meaning *exactly the same thing* for the test; the forms they send to the lab have no place for "approx weight of clothing" or "week of pregnancy at which weight measured."
Along with all the other things they claim to be able to judge using weight, I find that ridiculous.
And I intend to get to the end of this pregnancy without being weighed. I wasn't weighed either of the other times, because there was no clinical reason to do so and it wasn't policy; I was told at the time that this was because weighing pregnant women can make them restrict their food unnecessarily, which is not desirable.
We went to the scan and the technician asked chattily what we were hoping for; I said "A skull." So she first said "there's the skull, and the spine, they're fine," and I was able to look at the screen. She then showed us all the bits of the anatomy - the heart, both sides of the brain, the abdomen, feet and hands. She exclaimed "Oh that's cute!" when the baby sucked its thumb.
Rob feels that the whole thing is more real now and I have alleviated a big worry, which I knew was largely unfounded but still worried about.
Then there was the nonsense about the downs screening. "You want the combined screening?" "No, I want the nuchal fold screening." "OK."
About three people said that, but nonetheless I was directed, after the nuchal fold measurements were taken, to go and get blood drawn. So I did, and then the care assistant said "We need to have your weight."
I said "No, you don't, you just prefer to for your systems."
She had to go up the food chain to find someone who could officially accept that we declined the combined test and only wanted the nuchal fold one. But we managed it, and she understood that our declining the standardised testing was something the system ought to be able to cope with and just didn't because it's so unusual.
It's not the test I object to, though; it's the weighing. They weigh one once and use that measurement. They'd have weighed me at 5 weeks pregnant - only a few days after missing a period - wearing my light shoes, and used that. Or today they'd have weighed me wearing my hiking boots, two layers of winter underwear, many jumpers etc, at 13 weeks pregnant and being significantly larger. They would treat both of those weights as meaning *exactly the same thing* for the test; the forms they send to the lab have no place for "approx weight of clothing" or "week of pregnancy at which weight measured."
Along with all the other things they claim to be able to judge using weight, I find that ridiculous.
And I intend to get to the end of this pregnancy without being weighed. I wasn't weighed either of the other times, because there was no clinical reason to do so and it wasn't policy; I was told at the time that this was because weighing pregnant women can make them restrict their food unnecessarily, which is not desirable.