routine ultrasound - is it safe??

[Kirley64]

As for the husband wanting pictures - I really don't think that is such a bad reason when you think about it. We get to feel the baby, experience it in full. They get a kick every so often and see a growing belly - they have no other connection or attachment to the baby and I can totally understand a partner wanting the pictures - it is a more tangible thing to get attached to - and from what I understand, that is a fairly normal male way of thinking. I know my husband felt much better and more connected after seeing the ultrasounds (and if he couldn't be there for the scan in person, the pictures are vital.) Just something to think about before we judge how silly or foolish a reason it is for having an ultrasound.

Totally agree with this statement!! Very good point!

[Arcadia]

My key concern with ultrasound is their inherent ability to undermine a mother's own trust in her body, by placing the knowledge of her baby in the hands of a care provider.

Placenta, baby and cervix conditions can all change, and I question why doctors need to "know" what is going on at a regular basis (as in every appointment for a "quick look"). I support a 20 week morphology scan, to check for congenital issues which may need treatment at the time of birth, but even then, I wonder how many conditions need "in-utero" diagnosis and immediate treatment (just a hesitation, but I still support morphology scans).

In the case of bleeding, high risk pregnancies, or concerns about DS or other conditions, then I can see further ultrasounds are useful...but as was discussed in other threads...sometimes ultrasounds just stress out parents, rather than put their minds at ease.

As for checking size of the baby I think its a waste of time. It seems there is a great fear that babies will somehow be too big for women to birth. How can we grow babies that are too big for our bodies??? I just don't understand that...unless of course the woman has GD, but that can be detected by other means.

Ultrasounds haven't been checked for safety, we just assume they're safe because there are no obvious side effects. That in itself is a concern for our whole society, because we seem to embrace technology so openly, often with little critique of the knowledge the so called experts have on the subject. And lets face it...who wants to subject their baby to randomised trials on the safety of prenatal tests? That's why it hasn't been tested. We are the guinea pigs.

[juniper76]

That in itself is a concern for our whole society, because we seem to embrace technology so openly, often with little critique of the knowledge the so called experts have on the subject.

There are always people such as yourself who do not rush to embrace technology without seeing evidence of its safety and are willing to speak up about it. When enough people are speaking up, that's when they go to the trouble of proving their claims.

Personally, I'm grateful for the scans we've had. We took so long and went through so much to get pg and had one early loss along the way, so I find it reassuring to know that everything is on track. I can't wait until I can actually feel movement so that I can feel reassured without any tests.

I think, given the prevalence of pg u/s these days, if it were going to cause a problem, they would have seen a pattern of problems by now. This is not the first generation of children to be spied on in-utero. But that is not the same as proving that it's safe, so your point is entirely valid.