frustrated with Doctor. Am I rightfullt so? (a bit long, but needhelp!)

zolw wrote in message news:kcfrc.1742$JC5.241045@attbi_s54...
I am not sure why everyone is still stuck on the ultra sound issue. I
have already explained that it seemed to me that most drs give 2
ultrasounds. Now that I know they don't I do not want another
ultrasound. I just want to be certain that my child is alright.

Most of the arguing is still happening based on your first note, not
on subsequent information.

When you have a big thread like this, it's often difficult to keep
track of what further information is available.

Cathy Weeks
Mommy to Kivi Alexis 12/01

zolw wrote:

What expectations do i have that are so unrealistic? A dr that answers
my questions & doesn't brush me off? A dr that doesn't patronize me? If
I have concerns (with every right to have them, taking my family history
into consideration), he needs to address them. NOT IGNORE THEM!

I think you people donh't really know what my expectations are. It is
not about getting some tests or having a touchy feely dr. It is about
working with a person that treats you like a person, not just another
check in his bank account.

Well, you did mention both in your original post ;-)
The tests and medical care you are receiving seem appropriate,
with the possible exception of the attention he has paid to
your family history (maybe he considered it and wrote it down
somewhere later; maybe he didn't). I think most have agreed
that his manner seems a bad fit for you. It's hard to declare
it universally bad, as there are women who prefer that approach.

Best wishes,
Ericka

zolw wrote:

I also feel that so far into my pregnancy it will actually be
inconvenient for me to start shopping for another dr. Especially that
there is no guarante that the next dr I see won't be exactly the same
way. I will probably have to put up with what I believe to be not proper
care giving. I do not care if he is an OB or a midwife, there is ABC
treating other people. He can not always treat me like he is doing me a
favor. Actually he gets paid much more than his service deserves & he
should have the decency to treat his patients better. I am not asking
him to sit there & hug me or comfort me but he can smile every now &
then, he can listen to me when i have questions (instead he gives me
those patronising looks. I even caught myself sometimes apologizing for
having questions, which is real sad).

You must get past this. If you think it's bad now,
when you're just going in for routine prenatals in a healthy
pregnancy, heaven forbid you have to deal with this during
labor or if a complication crops up. If he is not the right
fit for you, CHANGE! Think of it this way--if you had these
feelings about a pediatrician for your child, don't you think
you would owe it to your child to change peds and get one
that gave the sort of care you felt your child needed and
deserved? Give up the fear of change and the unknown and
try another caregiver. Sure, you could end up with someone
who isn't any better, but you could end up making a huge
difference in your labor and delivery. You can get consult
appointments with other caregivers without transferring your
care. When you find one you like, *then* transfer your care.
Most offices will give a consult appointment for free.

Best wishes,
Ericka

Sorry to jump into this thread. I am a new in posting to NGs in
general. I am from India and amma (Mum) to my 10 month old DD. I hope
I don't scare the OP. But I feel OP has every right to have a US scan
if she is nervous about the health of her baby.

Wanted to share my experience. When I was in 36 weeks (I had a very
very 'normal' pregnancy until 34 weeks checkup), I went for a routine
(as far as the doc I consulted was concerned) US scan and found that
the fluid level was dangerously low and my placenta had deteriorated.
I did not feel any abnormal leakage. I still could feel baby movements
and so I thought all was well. I had an emergency induction, which
failed and ended up in c-section.

So now, how do we define a normal pregnancy? I thought everything was
normal until the US scan and I shudder to think what would have
happened otherwise. May be I would have been lucky noticing when the
baby started to become less active. But there is no guarentee.

Years back when US scan was not used, people may have been lucky. But
there were many people who lost babies due to unexplained reasons too
(at least in India). My grandma lost 2 of her kids in her 3rd
trimester and the rest 4 she had home births with mid wives (no
doctors).

Thanks for listening...

OSPAM (Naomi Pardue) wrote in message ...
I must admit that the idea of having little baby pics is a very tempting
idea, especially for a first timer. But my idea was that she was seeing
the development of her little girl. She was not totally in the dark.


And neither are you. THere are scores of books out there that describe (and
illustrate) the normal development and growth of a fetus. Since we can assume
that your baby is doing fine, I still don't see why you need to have pictures
of your particular baby. You really WILL get to see her. When she is born.

(It's only been in the past 15-20 years or so that ultrasound has been even
remotely routine in normal pregnancies. Women did just fine without getting
frequent peeks at their developing baby.)


Naomi
CAPPA Certified Lactation Educator

(either remove spamblock or change address to to e-mail
reply.)

"MomToN" wrote in message
m...


Wanted to share my experience. When I was in 36 weeks (I had a very
very 'normal' pregnancy until 34 weeks checkup), I went for a routine
(as far as the doc I consulted was concerned) US scan and found that
the fluid level was dangerously low and my placenta had deteriorated.
I did not feel any abnormal leakage. I still could feel baby movements
and so I thought all was well. I had an emergency induction, which
failed and ended up in c-section.


Wouldn't there be other signs of this -- small fundal height? Palpation
shows baby isn't growing well between visits? Doesn't blood pressure go up
if the placenta is failing?

I don't sit around worrying about this because I think there are signs that
would point one toward having an ultrasound to see if there is a problem.

Please correct me if I'm wrong. And I'm sure there are a few problems that
are found when everything else looks absolutely perfect; I just suspect they
are too few and far between to subject kids routinely to not-proven-safe
ultrasound.

-- Dagny
#1 10/03
#2 1/05

MomToN wrote:

Sorry to jump into this thread. I am a new in posting to NGs in
general. I am from India and amma (Mum) to my 10 month old DD. I hope
I don't scare the OP. But I feel OP has every right to have a US scan
if she is nervous about the health of her baby.

Wanted to share my experience. When I was in 36 weeks (I had a very
very 'normal' pregnancy until 34 weeks checkup), I went for a routine
(as far as the doc I consulted was concerned) US scan and found that
the fluid level was dangerously low and my placenta had deteriorated.
I did not feel any abnormal leakage. I still could feel baby movements
and so I thought all was well. I had an emergency induction, which
failed and ended up in c-section.

So now, how do we define a normal pregnancy? I thought everything was
normal until the US scan and I shudder to think what would have
happened otherwise. May be I would have been lucky noticing when the
baby started to become less active. But there is no guarentee.

I understand your feelings, especially given your
experience. However, I don't necessarily agree with your
conclusions. When studies have been done using very large
numbers of subjects, they have found that routine u/s does
*not* improve outcomes. That doesn't necessarily mean that
it never finds anything. It just means that statistically,
there is no difference in outcomes between groups that are
routinely scanned and those that are not. There are several
possible reasons for this:

1) The things that routine u/s find can't be treated. When
this happens, all you get is a heads up that there is
(or might be) a problem, but not really an opportunity
to fix the problem.

2) Routine u/s finds things that would be discovered via
another route and treated even without the routine u/s.
This, for example, is the case with placenta previa.
It is often detected via routine u/s, but the vast
majority of cases are detected even without routine u/s
due to third trimester bleeding. This may have also
been the case with your situation, as most cases of
low amniotic fluid and placental insufficiency are
diagnosed via u/s after medical indication. (There
have also been significant debates over how much
fluid is too little, with the threshhold for problems
having been dropped substantially recently.)

3) Sometimes routine u/s "finds" problems that aren't
really problems, leading to unnecessary interventions
that may cause risks of their own.

We live in a culture where the dominant paradigm in
pregnancy and childbirth is the notion that a healthy
baby can be guaranteed with enough testing and intervention.
Unfortunately, *science* doesn't always bear out that
theory. We also live (in the US) in a society where
access to care is rationed by ability to pay. The
consequence of increasing testing in one area is that
other areas get fewer resources. Personally, I would
prefer to have access to care based on solid, medical
evidence, rather than anything else. I would rather
we pay for all the things that are *known* to improve
outcomes before we start spending on things where there
isn't any proof of efficacy. Of course, if
people are willing to pay out of pocket for non-medically
indicated tests, then that's their business (in my
opinion).

Best wishes,
Ericka

ooh, I just read something interesting - placental insufficiency is
protective against prostate cancer in the baby throughout life!

I will talk to the consultant OBs at work about this - I've honestly never
heard of P.I. being more likely in subsequent pregnancies. I have, however
heard of IUGR being more likely, most probably due to lifestyle factors.

I'm not working again 'till Monday, but I'll get back when I find out for
you.

However, I don't see how seeing two doctors can avoid problems if there is
P.I...

Jo (RM)

zolw wrote:
That's actually not true. My sister had 3 pregnancies (2 children,
since she lost one of them in the 9th month) & in all 3 cases she had
placenta insufficiency. Actually the doctors (she was seeing 2
doctors at te same time, to avoid having the same problem as with her
unborn child) all agreed that if a woman has placenta insufficiency
once, she is at much higher risk to have it every time.

JoFromOz wrote:

Placental insufficiency in one pregnancy has nothing to do with the
health of the placenta in subsequent pregnancies, let alone a
pregnancy in another woman. It is also not that uncommon for
inductions to fail when a woman isn't ready to go into labour.

I really think that your sister's placental problems have anything
to do with you. That placenta was formed when the fertilised egg
implanted into her uterus... The body doesn't make the same placenta
twice

Jo (RM)

Welches wrote:

zolw wrote in message
news:E2Qqc.7387$zw.4579@attbi_s01...

yes, my sister has a condition called placenta insufficiency.
Apparently her placenta ages quickly. At the same time, she does
not get contractions or go into labor, even after induction. I have
already told my doctor about that (the first few appointments I
tried to give him as much family history as possible. I have an
aunt who would miscarriage every single pregnancy at 6 months.
Never had a child. My mom menopaused at the age of 38. So, I
thought all that may be real important for him to know), he just
said ok. Didn't even jot it down or anything.

I probably should mention it to him once more.

I wonder whether he might think it's appropriate to check (via u/s)
the placenta in 8th month. (apparently they can do this) Remind him
about your sister, and ask him whether it would be a good idea.
Might be a good idea to see if your insurance would cover this.
Suspect the aunt's problems were unrelated, and genetically she's
probably considered far enough from you not to be concerned-and
you're past 6 months :-)
Maybe if you haven't insurance for it you might think it was worth
paying to check the placenta?
I don't know whether there is any genetic aspect in placenta
insufficiency-maybe that would be a good point to start-by asking
your doctor that.
Debbie

Zolw, remember that a doctor is nothing more than a hired hand. If you
are not satisfied with his service, fire him and hire somebody else.
They aren't gods(although many think they are), they are human beings
(with an education) and are subject to all the failings and
shortcomings of the human race.
When you look for a new one, consider looking for a female OB/GYN
that herself has had children, she is more likely to be
empathetic.(Not to say their aren't very good male ones and lousy
female ones, but you are running out of time and you need to play the
odds).
You wouldn't hesitate to dismiss a gardener, interior designer,
tutor,carpenter, or craftsman, or any other "expert" whose work you
were unsatisfied with, why should a doctor be any different? You don't
have the knowledge to evaluate his skills? So what? No matter what his
expertise, if he is not taking you and your concerns seriously, he is
not the doctor for you.
I will be praying for you and your baby. Take care, and let us know
what happens.-Jitney

"Elfanie" wrote in message
...


#1 most scientifically accurate method of determining fetal weight
prior to birth? Asking mom.


Just to clarify for the OP -- asking a MULTIP mom is scientifically more
accurate than caregiver estimates and ultrasound. The OP is likely to say
"how the hell would I know?" Well, she wouldn't, she's a primip.

I'm looking forward to feeling another term baby and going, Oh yes, heavier
or lighter than Meg.

My baby was 9#3 and estimated by the OB and midwife as being very average --
7.5, 8 pounds. It turns out she was just very long (22") at birth, and I'm
tall. But yet, the estimate of fetal size was entirely appropriate because
she was of quite average "widths" and birthing a baby who's hiding weight in
her length is no problem. They come out lengthwise

-- Dagny

"zolw" wrote in message
news:bL9rc.30055$gr.3028579@attbi_s52...
Oh yeah, I have mentioned my concerns & my family history to the docor,
but he brushed me off.

I also have a list of questions every appointment (written down, so i
don't forget anything), but he always gives me a quick "this is normal"
or "you're pregnant" answers. & if I try to push him to give me more
detailed answers, he usually seems upset that I want more details.

You're really hung up on your family's history. I'm not saying it's not
awful, or sad, but I'm just not sure how much it matters in regards to
*your* pregnancy.

My mom had a miscarriage. I never have. My sister took 2 + yrs to get
pregnant with her first. The longest it's taken me is 4 months (for 2
months of that I didn't know about charting or ovulation).

Their histories aren't mine.

I think the answers your Dr gives you (it's normal and you're pregnant) are
sufficent, jsut not long-winded.

Get a new Dr if he's so cold and aloof.

Sophie
#4 due July 7, 2004