My wife wanted natural delivery for all out children, but our first daughter was breech. The obstetrician, woman, favored natural deliveries, not c-sections, and saw no need for ultrasounds. My wife said she just didn't feel right, something was wrong, and an ultrasound was done and indicated a footling breech position, the most dangerous for both baby and momma. My wife tried natural several techniques suggested by the obstetrician to have the baby move to a normal or at least buttucks first breech position, a bit safer. Nothing worked. She was recommended to see an obstetrician who was supposedly skilled in manual reversions. I cringed and left the room while the procedure was done. The doctor was convinced he was successful. An ultrasound still showed a footling breech. The original obstetrician said she had successfully delivered breech birthings of all positions, so when my wife went into labor she hoped for a natural delivery as did the doctor, but was prepared for a C-section because of what the ultrasounds revealed. I was in the room when my wifes labor was painful and long, then required an emergency C-section with my wife insisting I stay in the room. Our first born was birthed via C-section and when I saw her, she looked like an angel. Now 36 years later my oldest daughter has given birth to three healthy babies, the first a C-section in the hospital; the next two natural with a mid-wife in her bedroom. My wife went on to have 4 more children, all natural vaginal births. But I recall how helpful we found the ultrasounds for our first child and for my wife. Without them my wife's plan was to give birth in our home, which given the breech position could have ended the life of both my wife and my first daughter.
Thank you. I wish I had this advice. Way back when. And it is sad how much “old wives tales“ were so much wiser than we are today. We have a family member who nearly aborted, because the doctors assured her that her child was going to be born with multiple birth defects. Luckily, they didn’t listen. The child came out perfect!
THANK YOU for saying this! It needs to be said, and said again. And thank you for mentioning the toxicity of the gel. I looked into this when I had treatments. Because of the toxicity, I used coconut oil instead. But if you want the doctor to use it instead of gel for imaging, he will refuse. Why? It is said to work. And by the way, we shouldn't be using ultrasound if a mother plans to abort if the baby has an anomaly. Why? Because ultrasound can be dead wrong. If the baby is normal, she just got rid of a normal child she wanted. If the baby has an anomaly that doesn't show up, the mother just might sue the doctor! And in any case, it is simply wrong to kill a baby for not being perfect. None of us is perfect. And it devalues those of us with more obvious medical problems. It is the precursor to atrocities of other kinds. If the mother cannot handle a baby with that particular problem, she can choose adoption. She may say it will hurt more to do that than have an abortion, but studies show the opposite is true. I even talked to a woman for some time who had had an abortion because her baby had hydrocephalus. She was an emotional MESS! She told me, 'If I could just have looked into his eyes." And this was at a time when they were doing prenatal surgery for this condition, and we know it is caused by deficiencies in certain B vitamins. Totally ludicrous. My nephew has Down Syndrome. My sister refused a test because she would never consent to an abortion. He is a precious human being, a valued member of the family, deeply loved. And a truly amazing human being. In fact, he has unbelievable skills in language. His language development was even earlier than that of a child who is considered a genius at languages, and later on, I was able to teach him foreign languages very quickly. If we would stop trying to force them into our broken educational system and teach them the way they learn, he could have made a career as an interpreter. His talent has been wasted by our attitudes.
Hi, Jennifer, here to brag , neither of our daughters were ultrasounded during my wife’s pregnancy 41 & 44 years ago: after birth they did unfortunately get their share of Tylenol I am sad to say, but I didn’t know any better then (and likely no one else did).
Thanks for linking the Tylenol articles.
I found that a good menstrual history (cycle length, mittleschmertz, regularity, etc. & serial clinical exams (and knowing the fruit scale of uterine size for bimanual exams 8 wk lemon or tennis ball, 10 weeks large orange, 12 weeks grapefruit)helps a lot in prenatal care); still, I confess I was probably too liberal with ordering ultrasounds on my patients, though less so than my OB colleagues.
Unfortunately… the narrative has been pushed and pushed for ultrasounds . 3 D ultrasounds are now done as a side hustle by radiology companies and obstetrical offices to make CASH 💰. Yep never have to report a dime ! ACOG has made ultrasounds standard of care for dating the gestation , Anatomy scans and growth . Patients can refuse anytime! I hope they do . Remember there are malpractice attorneys out there when there is a fetal anomaly that was not found and you have a wrongful life case on your hands …. Or a malpositioned birth that needs a stat c-section or fetal distress that’s not acted up quickly enough . Lot to unpack here , thank you . Btw the jab has been the worse thing that was recommended by the ACOG . The side effects have been horrific. Ultrasounds have picked up growth disorders, abruption sand many side effects from the jab .
Thank you for this! My goal is to have a vbac and I would love a homebirth but the state doesn’t allow it because you know, doctors know better than midwives because they are also surgeons (sarcasm). But it means I have to give birth in a hospital and I’m nervous to request no ultrasounds since if they don’t accept me as a patient bc of that (can they reject you for no ultrasounds? I feel like they’d demand it bc of my C-section?), then we may have to go out of state, which is a lot financially and when we have a very energetic toddler
I have heard about this before. It makes one wonder if anything the medical community does is really safe. How were billions of humans ever born before all this modern technology? They want us to believe that we could never survive on our own without all this medical tyranny.
Pregnant women should run far away from any "medical" test involving any sort of waves, regardless of how "safe" they are assured such a test is. Now that we see all of the disability and death caused by the "safe & effective" Plandemic products, it should be quite clear that no one in any medical field should be automatically trusted to not put their wallet first.
I opted not to have any ultrasounds with most of my pregnancies... Or so I thought at the time. I didn't realize doppler was also ultrasound. Earlier this month I gave birth at home to my first baby who had had no doppler or ultrasound, except for some doppler during labor to more easily check on baby's well being.
Definitely an interesting perspective on such a routine, ubiquitous medical procedure used during pregnancy. I delivered two healthy babies after uncomplicated pregnancies, although both were ever-so-slightly preterm, and I underwent all of the recommended ultrasounds.
It is eye-opening, therefore, to learn that these procedures are potentially dangerous to mothers and their unborn babies. A bit alarming, actually. It truly calls into question the legitimacy of the need for many routine medical procedures, and while most doctors have their patients' best interests at heart, there are certainly always incentives influencing their medical advice and treatment.
That being said, this is a refreshing reminder to educate ourselves on our healthcare decisions, and those of our providers. It certainly doesn't entirely blacklist ultrasounds in my book, but it is important to weigh all the benefits and potential risks when making any medical decision, especially during pregnancy.
Woah there...I'm going to admit I didn't finish reading this...but I need to pull a flag here...you are making a claim that sonographers don't understand, but you link to an article with only 22 sonographers as part of the sample where only 22 participants were able to show understanding....going to hazard it was the sonographers.
I am a sonographer. We do understand, most of are registered and have degrees on the use of ultrasound. I also know other users (doctors, midwives, nurses )don't as much, so I wouldn't want an fetal ultrasound from just anyone (some are very knowledgeable and more and more included in didactics). There are very clear guidelines for scanning time length based on body part and mechanical index guidelines based on body part being imaged.
I wholeheartedly disagree with a ultrasound without a valid medical reason (ie-entertainment ultrasounds), however there recently has been a lot of fear mongering that has led to people not receiving appropriate medical care. So please be careful of the blanket term sonographer for all users of ultrasound as it is wholly incorrect.
An interesting read until “the disturbing rise of autism” was flung around. The “rise” of autism has far more to do with people actually having an understanding of diagnostic criteria and people actually diagnosing women and POC. Not just little white boys and their parents that feel autism “stole” their child.
Not eugenic ableist fear mongering fuel. Insanely insensitive.
I'm pregnant with baby #5 and kind of torn about this this time. I had an anatomy scan with my first baby. It was stressful because they saw an echogenic focus on her heart and made me do a level 2 scan to rule out Down Syndrome. Everything proved to be fine, but it was a nerve wracking two weeks waiting for that follow-up scan.
I had zero ultrasounds with babies 2, 3, and 4, although I did allow the Doppler to be used at 12 weeks to confirm a heartbeat. They were all born at home perfectly healthy.
My midwife for this current pregnancy recommends one anatomy scan, and I have been leaning toward getting it since I'm older now. But this is a good reminder of the drawbacks to this technology. It's early so I still have a lot of time to decide.
My wife wanted natural delivery for all out children, but our first daughter was breech. The obstetrician, woman, favored natural deliveries, not c-sections, and saw no need for ultrasounds. My wife said she just didn't feel right, something was wrong, and an ultrasound was done and indicated a footling breech position, the most dangerous for both baby and momma. My wife tried natural several techniques suggested by the obstetrician to have the baby move to a normal or at least buttucks first breech position, a bit safer. Nothing worked. She was recommended to see an obstetrician who was supposedly skilled in manual reversions. I cringed and left the room while the procedure was done. The doctor was convinced he was successful. An ultrasound still showed a footling breech. The original obstetrician said she had successfully delivered breech birthings of all positions, so when my wife went into labor she hoped for a natural delivery as did the doctor, but was prepared for a C-section because of what the ultrasounds revealed. I was in the room when my wifes labor was painful and long, then required an emergency C-section with my wife insisting I stay in the room. Our first born was birthed via C-section and when I saw her, she looked like an angel. Now 36 years later my oldest daughter has given birth to three healthy babies, the first a C-section in the hospital; the next two natural with a mid-wife in her bedroom. My wife went on to have 4 more children, all natural vaginal births. But I recall how helpful we found the ultrasounds for our first child and for my wife. Without them my wife's plan was to give birth in our home, which given the breech position could have ended the life of both my wife and my first daughter.
Thank you. I wish I had this advice. Way back when. And it is sad how much “old wives tales“ were so much wiser than we are today. We have a family member who nearly aborted, because the doctors assured her that her child was going to be born with multiple birth defects. Luckily, they didn’t listen. The child came out perfect!
THANK YOU for saying this! It needs to be said, and said again. And thank you for mentioning the toxicity of the gel. I looked into this when I had treatments. Because of the toxicity, I used coconut oil instead. But if you want the doctor to use it instead of gel for imaging, he will refuse. Why? It is said to work. And by the way, we shouldn't be using ultrasound if a mother plans to abort if the baby has an anomaly. Why? Because ultrasound can be dead wrong. If the baby is normal, she just got rid of a normal child she wanted. If the baby has an anomaly that doesn't show up, the mother just might sue the doctor! And in any case, it is simply wrong to kill a baby for not being perfect. None of us is perfect. And it devalues those of us with more obvious medical problems. It is the precursor to atrocities of other kinds. If the mother cannot handle a baby with that particular problem, she can choose adoption. She may say it will hurt more to do that than have an abortion, but studies show the opposite is true. I even talked to a woman for some time who had had an abortion because her baby had hydrocephalus. She was an emotional MESS! She told me, 'If I could just have looked into his eyes." And this was at a time when they were doing prenatal surgery for this condition, and we know it is caused by deficiencies in certain B vitamins. Totally ludicrous. My nephew has Down Syndrome. My sister refused a test because she would never consent to an abortion. He is a precious human being, a valued member of the family, deeply loved. And a truly amazing human being. In fact, he has unbelievable skills in language. His language development was even earlier than that of a child who is considered a genius at languages, and later on, I was able to teach him foreign languages very quickly. If we would stop trying to force them into our broken educational system and teach them the way they learn, he could have made a career as an interpreter. His talent has been wasted by our attitudes.
Hi, Jennifer, here to brag , neither of our daughters were ultrasounded during my wife’s pregnancy 41 & 44 years ago: after birth they did unfortunately get their share of Tylenol I am sad to say, but I didn’t know any better then (and likely no one else did).
Thanks for linking the Tylenol articles.
I found that a good menstrual history (cycle length, mittleschmertz, regularity, etc. & serial clinical exams (and knowing the fruit scale of uterine size for bimanual exams 8 wk lemon or tennis ball, 10 weeks large orange, 12 weeks grapefruit)helps a lot in prenatal care); still, I confess I was probably too liberal with ordering ultrasounds on my patients, though less so than my OB colleagues.
Unfortunately… the narrative has been pushed and pushed for ultrasounds . 3 D ultrasounds are now done as a side hustle by radiology companies and obstetrical offices to make CASH 💰. Yep never have to report a dime ! ACOG has made ultrasounds standard of care for dating the gestation , Anatomy scans and growth . Patients can refuse anytime! I hope they do . Remember there are malpractice attorneys out there when there is a fetal anomaly that was not found and you have a wrongful life case on your hands …. Or a malpositioned birth that needs a stat c-section or fetal distress that’s not acted up quickly enough . Lot to unpack here , thank you . Btw the jab has been the worse thing that was recommended by the ACOG . The side effects have been horrific. Ultrasounds have picked up growth disorders, abruption sand many side effects from the jab .
Thank you for this! My goal is to have a vbac and I would love a homebirth but the state doesn’t allow it because you know, doctors know better than midwives because they are also surgeons (sarcasm). But it means I have to give birth in a hospital and I’m nervous to request no ultrasounds since if they don’t accept me as a patient bc of that (can they reject you for no ultrasounds? I feel like they’d demand it bc of my C-section?), then we may have to go out of state, which is a lot financially and when we have a very energetic toddler
I have heard about this before. It makes one wonder if anything the medical community does is really safe. How were billions of humans ever born before all this modern technology? They want us to believe that we could never survive on our own without all this medical tyranny.
Pregnant women should run far away from any "medical" test involving any sort of waves, regardless of how "safe" they are assured such a test is. Now that we see all of the disability and death caused by the "safe & effective" Plandemic products, it should be quite clear that no one in any medical field should be automatically trusted to not put their wallet first.
I opted not to have any ultrasounds with most of my pregnancies... Or so I thought at the time. I didn't realize doppler was also ultrasound. Earlier this month I gave birth at home to my first baby who had had no doppler or ultrasound, except for some doppler during labor to more easily check on baby's well being.
And... what is it like experiential for the baby??? Must be a huge " what the fuck is that???" moment for the baby...
Thanks Jennifer. Never heard this before, but it isn’t surprising given the edifice of lies that much of medicine has become.
Definitely an interesting perspective on such a routine, ubiquitous medical procedure used during pregnancy. I delivered two healthy babies after uncomplicated pregnancies, although both were ever-so-slightly preterm, and I underwent all of the recommended ultrasounds.
It is eye-opening, therefore, to learn that these procedures are potentially dangerous to mothers and their unborn babies. A bit alarming, actually. It truly calls into question the legitimacy of the need for many routine medical procedures, and while most doctors have their patients' best interests at heart, there are certainly always incentives influencing their medical advice and treatment.
That being said, this is a refreshing reminder to educate ourselves on our healthcare decisions, and those of our providers. It certainly doesn't entirely blacklist ultrasounds in my book, but it is important to weigh all the benefits and potential risks when making any medical decision, especially during pregnancy.
Woah there...I'm going to admit I didn't finish reading this...but I need to pull a flag here...you are making a claim that sonographers don't understand, but you link to an article with only 22 sonographers as part of the sample where only 22 participants were able to show understanding....going to hazard it was the sonographers.
I am a sonographer. We do understand, most of are registered and have degrees on the use of ultrasound. I also know other users (doctors, midwives, nurses )don't as much, so I wouldn't want an fetal ultrasound from just anyone (some are very knowledgeable and more and more included in didactics). There are very clear guidelines for scanning time length based on body part and mechanical index guidelines based on body part being imaged.
I wholeheartedly disagree with a ultrasound without a valid medical reason (ie-entertainment ultrasounds), however there recently has been a lot of fear mongering that has led to people not receiving appropriate medical care. So please be careful of the blanket term sonographer for all users of ultrasound as it is wholly incorrect.
An interesting read until “the disturbing rise of autism” was flung around. The “rise” of autism has far more to do with people actually having an understanding of diagnostic criteria and people actually diagnosing women and POC. Not just little white boys and their parents that feel autism “stole” their child.
Not eugenic ableist fear mongering fuel. Insanely insensitive.
Stop spreading misinformation for profit.
I'm pregnant with baby #5 and kind of torn about this this time. I had an anatomy scan with my first baby. It was stressful because they saw an echogenic focus on her heart and made me do a level 2 scan to rule out Down Syndrome. Everything proved to be fine, but it was a nerve wracking two weeks waiting for that follow-up scan.
I had zero ultrasounds with babies 2, 3, and 4, although I did allow the Doppler to be used at 12 weeks to confirm a heartbeat. They were all born at home perfectly healthy.
My midwife for this current pregnancy recommends one anatomy scan, and I have been leaning toward getting it since I'm older now. But this is a good reminder of the drawbacks to this technology. It's early so I still have a lot of time to decide.