Did you drink without knowing you were pregnant?

TerriBull
“Advice gets turned on it's head quite often as more findings become apparent. For instance, new mothers were instructed to place baby on its front in the cot when I became a first time mum, that was reversed some time ago.”
All the time! Advice given when my children were babies (40+ years ago) have been completely reversed. Sleeping in their own cot/co-sleeping, feeding every 4 hours/on demand, hospital delivery/home delivery and so on. Perhaps I should have listened to my own instincts then!

I'm sure I did, not like a fish, but my first pregnancy was unplanned. I do remember on one of my regular check ups when I knew I was pregnant, my doctor told me, a glass of wine or two a week is not a problem. Advice gets turned on it's head quite often as more findings become apparent. For instance, new mothers were instructed to place baby on its front in the cot when I became a first time mum, that was reversed some time ago.

The text was supposed to have appeared in italics

SueDonim

This article from the Guardian says it all for me. Where does this all end? There are women in prison right now in America for having a miscarriage, which they are deemed to have caused because they drank/took drugs/behaved inappropriately, even though at this moment in time there is no scientific way to prove that such acts cause a miscarriage.

This is a step on the path to a Handmaid’s Tale world, with women simply being vessels to incubate babies. Don’t think it can’t happen. It’s happening already in Scotland. My daughter’s pregnant friends are outraged about being monitored in this way, although they don’t know whether the details will be passed on into their child’s records.

www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2020/sep/18/bilge-booze-misogyny-outrage-police-pregnant-women?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Paddyanne
Sorry I tried to put up the quote but it did not appear

mokryna Where in Scotland? My sons partner recently had a baby and she wasn't monitored about alcohol ,or in fact much .She had few appointments with the midwife ,none of the restriction I had when pregnant. My consultant had us all on diets ,bran with semi skimmed milk and a piece of fruit for breakfast ,soup and a salad at lunch and a cooked dinner.No sweets or treats .We all left hosital slimmer than we were when we got pregnant .Honestly sometimes when I see young mums piling on 4 stone I think maybe he got it right .Though backthen I 'd have killed for a bag of crisps ( too much salt) or some liquorice allsorts ( bad for BP) I had pre eclampsia twice ,if your daughters friends are being monitored I'd say within reason its probably for their own good .

When I became pregnant with my first daughter (now 36) I suffered very badly from indigestion. I found that the usual remedies were no help, but a glass of red wine, after certain foods, did the trick.
I visited my GP to ask if wine would be likely to cause any future problems to my baby.
He actually told me to have the wine, in moderation, pointing out that it was a natural substance, unlike some powerful acid remedies, and that it would do no harm.
That was a long time ago, and I expect that some ideas have changed, but the ideas of self determination, and of a right to privacy, hopefully haven't.
I think this is a disgrace and the idea should be withdrawn.

650,000 babies born every year, of which 4-500 have foetal alcohol syndrome. These children are not randomly scattered across the population regardless of parents living or drinking habits. Lets concentrate the effort on the children specifically at risk and the health professionals who work with and can recognise which mothers and their potential offspring are most at risk.

This scattergun approach will be expensive, makes it less likely such mothers will be picked up and most will lie.

What they have never asked is whether the children affected by such a policy, may not themselves, when adult, object to having this informaton on their medicsl file

Yes, exactly. No one is going to incriminate themselves!

-It’s happening already in Scotland. My daughter’s pregnant friends are outraged about being monitored in this way, although they don’t know whether the details will be passed on into their child’s records- .
It’s obvious, you would lie.
In this day and age we all know it’s bad to ‘drink’ but to do it when you don’t know you are pregnant is another thing and then to have it noted! Of course if you are trying for a baby you wouldn’t be drinking but neither would the future father, for the quality of sperm. It takes two so maybe they should also note how much the father had drunk the previous week or so.

GrauntyHelen

If you had seen the effects of feotal alcohol syndrome on a child you would be in favour of this move

I have had two friends raising children with FAS. The birth mothers both had a heck of a lot more problems than one drink before they even knew they were pregnant. That’s where resources need to be concentrated, not on judging the daily habits of a large percentage of the female population.

BTW, whilst FAS is a lifelong and very serious condition, both those children have flourished in the care of my friends and each has far exceeded what was predicted for them at a young age.

No I was tee total then. Also I didn't know about peanut allergy so ate peanuts and gave my babies peanut butter! Marmite spread was recommended by the health visitor, now I understand is deemed too salty. Same with fresh soft cheeses in blissful ignorance. Luckily I never smoked, before during or after.

GrauntyHelen

If you had seen the effects of feotal alcohol syndrome on a child you would be in favour of this move

With respect, this is an entirely illogical statement, GrauntyHelen.

Are you seriously suggesting that one drink in early pregnancy is likely to cause FASD? And if you are, are you honestly suggesting that just in case it does, women should be monitored and controlled to this extent? And that anyone who is not in favour of these controls does not care about damaged babies?

Should all women of childbearing age refrain from doing, eating or drinking anything that might potentially harm a hypothetical child? How would you suggest that this be enforced?

I understand FAS perfectly - I also understand misogyny even more so. This isn’t the way to deal with problem drinking.

If you had seen the effects of feotal alcohol syndrome on a child you would be in favour of this move

Absolutely*SueD*. I posted on Thursday that was an example of institutionalised misogyny and I stand by that. It’s also a way into attacking abortion rights as it’s also about the rights of the foetus. If things go as Trump wants with the Supreme Court, abortion will disappear over there in the next few years over there and where the American right goes, so does ours.

This article from the Guardian says it all for me. Where does this all end? There are women in prison right now in America for having a miscarriage, which they are deemed to have caused because they drank/took drugs/behaved inappropriately, even though at this moment in time there is no scientific way to prove that such acts cause a miscarriage.

This is a step on the path to a Handmaid’s Tale world, with women simply being vessels to incubate babies. Don’t think it can’t happen. It’s happening already in Scotland. My daughter’s pregnant friends are outraged about being monitored in this way, although they don’t know whether the details will be passed on into their child’s records.

www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2020/sep/18/bilge-booze-misogyny-outrage-police-pregnant-women?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

A baby born to a mother who had a single alcoholic drink (which will, apparently, get recorded) is not going to have an agonising withdrawal.

Clearly, a baby who is suffering that sort of reaction will need help, and it would make much more sense to put money into helping both the babies (whose Health Visitors should be able to pick up on the problems) and people with drink problems.

Treating the issue of alcoholism as something that might affect the babies of drinkers is to ignore the serious impact of alcohol on both men and women (and their children) of all ages. It also stigmatises people who drink, and shifts the blame from those who produce, advertise and supply alcohol, as well as the governments who rake in tax from its sales. We hear a lot about the 'cost to the NHS' of alcoholism in the UK, but that is rarely (if ever) set alongside the income generated by the industry.

The chance to decline to participate in the recording of consumption is implicit in the right to tell lies, which is likely to damage the relationship between the expectant mother and the health professionals caring for her.

In my day nobody batted an eyelid at the odd glass of wine but I realise that Foetal Alcohol Syndrome is a very real thing.

In my case I was dosing myself up with paracetamol to try to fend off flu (yes, with a fever which I was trying to ignore) in the early weeks, before I actually realised I was pregnant.
My baby boy was born with congenital heart defects and died at 24 days.
Afterwards I found out the critical period when his heart was developing occurs at that early stage and can be affected by a fever.
Damage can be inflicted however unwittingly and he was a much wanted baby.

It may be a way to determine risk to the unborn child coming to term or whether to be watching for withdrawal for the baby after birth which might be dangerous...and agonising.
I do not immediately think it is a conspiracy against women but would want to know the purposes. I suspect you will be given a chance to decline.

That actually cuts both ways MOnica doesn’t it?

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

No Sing this is not a research study. It’s a consultation document from NICE suggesting the recording of any drinking at all being recorded on a baby’s medical records for life. What’s true about alcohol and foetal health is that there is no evidence of a safe level of alcohol during pregnancy - this doesn’t mean there isn’t a safe level.

Could this be for research purposes? If so the woman would have to give consent.

Research into smoking in pregnancy showed there were long term effects. Grandchildren of the smoker were found to have fertility issues.

Perhaps this is why they want to record alcohol intake? Or there may be some research that shows if a woman knows the question will be asked, they are likely to drink less.

All this will do is to encourage pregnant women to lie about their alcohol consumption and any other unhealthy habits such as smoking or a poor diet. I think doctors are quite sceptical about the replies to such questions by all patients not just those in the ante natal ward!

I drank moderately in first pregnancy until I got a positive test at 2 months gestation and then stopped. 2nd pregnancy I didn’t drink before or after as I entirely stopped for a few years. 3rd one I stopped immediately and had one glass of white wine on a Saturday night. All healthy.