PDA

View Full Version : Did you have the AFP (triple screen) test done?



turtledove
09-12-2005, 12:36 PM
I am seriously doubting declining the AFP test. I know there are some number of false positives. Also, in our case, the results wouldn't change the outcome of our pregnancy. I'm kinda thinking that I want to know, though. Actually, what I want is to take it and come back extremely low risk for everything, but of course I can't guarantee that. What did you personally decide to do, and if you feel comfortable, please share your reasons behind the decision. Obviously, I'm running out of time to make this decision!

TIA!


Updated to add I'm 29 and have no history of genetic disorders on either mine or DH's side. I have been taking prenatals for over a year, and have not engaged in any "risky" behavior. Also, I'm 15 weeks pregnant (since it doesn't appear that my ticker showed up) with my first child.

Kristen

TahliasMom
09-12-2005, 12:47 PM
yes and we were also low risk but either way it wasn't going to affect our decision about the pregnancy. it was more for peace of mind but even if it did turn out positive we would have not done further testing. we educated ourselves about the risks of pregnancy and were prepared to embrace and love whatever God gave us.

jenmcadams
09-12-2005, 12:49 PM
I voted yes b/c I had it done w/ child #2, but I did pass on it the first time. The first time, my reasoning was much the same as yours. However, this time I'm a little older and I think the test my doctor did this time (I thought it was called the quad screen now), was supposed to have a lower incidence for false positives than the screening test that was available when my DD was born.

TraciG
09-12-2005, 12:52 PM
I don't even remember if they asked me if I wanted they just did it like all the other tests, anyway because of it I had to have amnio done, had a false positive.

jhaud
09-12-2005, 12:54 PM
also a yes... i really never gave it a second thought... when given the order for the bloodwork, i knew what it was for but am one to try to follow recommendations (well... not as much with the ped!). anyways... i know i'll have it done again next time. i was 32/33 with pg #1 and am 34 now and ttc. so... with that said, it would not affect our decision about outcome of pg, but if any problems, i would rather have the opportunity to educate myself prior to birth. i know we won't be given more than we can handle and any child of ours would have lots and lots of love.

jennifer

turtledove
09-12-2005, 12:59 PM
That is what I'm scared about - a false positive. I don't want to worry the rest of my pregnancy either by having it done and a false positive or not having it done and not knowing...

khakismom
09-12-2005, 01:05 PM
I didn't have it with Kathleen, mainly because of all the false positives. But I did have it with Ellen and Bridget, and it was the quad screen. Both tests came back low-risk.

hez
09-12-2005, 01:07 PM
I was 28 (and low risk) when we had Payton, and it wouldn't have changed anything, so we didn't do it. In our case things turned out fine. If I were older I might choose otherwise.

Edited to clarify.

KrisM
09-12-2005, 01:08 PM
I did not, and will not for future pregnancies, even though I turn 35 on Sunday. It's just a screening test and it gives you a new statistic for your risk of various things. My problem is that. If I have a higher risk after taking this, do I get an amnio? Probably not. So, what, now I just spend the next 20 some weeks worrying about what that higher risk really means to me and the baby.

I'm comfortable with the small risk I have for having problems. I'm less comfortable with the possibility of worrying for 20 weeks.

I have a bunch of numbers on the likelyhood of false positives and false negatives, if you're interested. It's a lot of math :).

searchdog
09-12-2005, 01:09 PM
I think this is the test they did. We declined it at first since I was young, 23, and was low risk. Then we had our 20 week ultrasound and they feared DD had Trisomy 18 so I was a wreck since Trisomy 18 is NOT a good thing and babies rarely survive if they have it. I went to my OB's office directly from the hospital after having the ultrasound and he calmed me down and said he really wasn't worried (he had already talked to the doc at the hospital that read the ultrasound) and said just for piece of mind he would go ahead and give us the paperwork for the screening test and leave it up to me and DH as to whether or not we wanted to do it, but that we had to do it that day since I was already 20 or 21 weeks. We did the test and everything came back fine. We went back at 28 weeks for another ultrasound and they told us everything looked fine now (what they saw before, cysts in the brain, were gone) and we had a perfectly healthy little girl at this point. It was a long 8 weeks for us and I stopped buying anything baby related and the nursery was put on hold until we got the news that everything was for sure looking good.

Not trying to scare you, just telling you what we did. Everything turned out great and we have a wonderful healty little girl.

kristenk
09-12-2005, 01:10 PM
I declined it for a couple of reasons. First, as you stated, the results wouldn't change the outcome of my pregnancy. Second, I asked the ob what the follow-up would be if the test came back and we needed any follow-up done. She said that it would be an amnio. I really didn't want to have an amnio b/c of the risks to the baby and told my ob. I discussed with my ob, and we decided that skipping the triple screen would be best for me. She also asked me, since she knew that we'd continue the pregnancy no matter what the test said, if we wanted to be surprised with bad news in the delivery room or if we wanted time to prepare if something was wrong. Sorry for the rambling post, but it really was sort of a rambling-all-sorts-of-reasons-factoring-in decision that we made.

nd93
09-12-2005, 01:13 PM
I never did testing with any of my kids (3). 1) I would never terminate. 2) High rate of false positives 3) if it did come back positive/showing increased risk for __ I wouldn't want to undergo an amnio (which also has risks). We just figured if God gave us a high needs baby that's what we were meant to have and we would deal with any issues at that time.

I was also 28, 30, and 32 for those pregnancies, and with family histories knew my risks were low anyway.

If you decide to get it, think ahead to what if it is positive? Would you get the amnio? Talk with your dr about what happens after a positive, then decide if you would want to do all of that or not.

Good luck to you on the rest of your pregnancy!

ribbit1019
09-12-2005, 01:17 PM
We didn't have the screen and will not have it for future pregnancies.

I felt the high incidence of false positives, on top of the fact that it would not determine the outcome of the pregnancy, and that I would not submit for an amnio, were in our case reason to avoid it.

My midwife didn't even sniff when I said I didn't want it this time either. I did have to sign a form though.

Christy
Maddy born 06/09/04
http://lilypie.com/baby2/040609/3/4/0/-5/.png
Little Peanut due 03/02/06
http://bd.lilypie.com/K8fum4/.png

Emmas Mom
09-12-2005, 01:19 PM
I did & got a positive. We've pretty much determined it was a false positive, but it has been a source of stress to me. We would have the baby regardless but I guess I wanted to explore it so I could be more mentally/emotionally prepared "just in case". So far, things are going well & #2 has had no apparent genetic markers on any of the ultrasounds we've had. I have not chosen to have an amnio done so far but my doctor advised I still can if I choose to. I this point, as long as the US's are looking ok I don't think we will.

emilyf
09-12-2005, 01:28 PM
I did with my first, and declined with this pregnancy-I was 30 for the 1st one, and 33 now-pretty much the same reasoning as others. High rate of false positive, the test doesn't really tell you anything and anything catastrophic enough for me to consider terminating would show up on an ultrasound anyway. I was somewhat pressured into it 1st time around by my ob, this time I'm seeing a midwife group and they encouraged me not to do it.
Emily \r\nmom of Charlie born 11/02

pb&j
09-12-2005, 01:35 PM
I did not have it done for this pg, or my previous one (which ended in stillbirth at 24 wks). HOWEVER, I did have the 1st tri Nuchal Translucency screening with bloodwork, which also tests for chromosomal (such as T21 and T18) and other issues. I had a very bad result on this test with my daughter, due to her defects, even though they were not chromosomal in nature. (And I had a GREAT result this time, thank goodness!) I will have this test done with any subsequent pregnancies, without hesitation.

FWIW, I am young, healthy, fit, took all my vitamins, took no meds, drank no alcohol, didn't smoke, and had no family history of any birth defects whatsoever on either mine or DH's side of the family.


-Ry,
mom to Emma, s/b 11/04/04
and Max, edd 01/15/06 - it's a BOY!

http://lilypie.com/days/060115/3/25/1/-5/.png[/img] ([img)

MommyAllison
09-12-2005, 01:36 PM
I didn't have the screen (we were offered a quad screen) done either, for most of the same reasons mentioned above (wouldn't terminate in any circumstance, high incidence of false positives and negatives, and unwilling to do an amnio anyway). However, I'm in one of the very low risk categories (just turned 21 a few weeks ago) so I wasn't super concerned about it anyway. When my nurse was explaining the screen to me at our first appt, she seemed to be saying without actually saying it that she didn't recommend it for us - but we did have to sign a form saying we were offered and declined the test. Good luck on your decision!

Allison
EDD 10-30-05
http://lilypie.com/days/051030/0/25/1/-8/.png (http://lilypie.com)

amp
09-12-2005, 01:38 PM
Nope. Refused it w/ both of these pregnancies. I stress and worry way to easily and for me, ignorance was bliss. I knew if it came back positive, even falsely so, I couldn't handle the worry that would follow. And I'm AMA this time, but I refused the AFP and the amnio.

lisa56308
09-12-2005, 01:43 PM
I had the triple screen at 26 with my first child and the quad screen at 35 with my second. The first was normal but my quad screen came back with an elevated risk for downs. We were sent for a level 2 ultrasound and everything looked fine on that (no ds "markers" found). We had the option of amnio and may have proceeded with that had the u/s showed anything. We had decided that whatever happened, it wouldn't change the pregnancy. But if something was found, we would have time to do some research so we would be better prepared for special needs.

Lisa
Jacob 6/95
Tyler 10/03

saschalicks
09-12-2005, 01:49 PM
DH & I talked about this before getting pregnant. I wanted to have a clear head on our decision. We did the AFP and would do the amnio if needed. If the amnio or any other tests showed there was some sort of problem that would greatly hinder the level of life this child would have we would not keep it. Now, that can be arbitrary as to what extent we were willing to deal with, but our thoughts were more geared to serious issues. My brother was born with Cleft, Lip & Palate w/out my parents knowing until he was born. Even if I knew I would still have the baby. We checked for this in both pregnancies (b/c it is hereditary) and have come out OK, but it wouldn't change anything. I know many people couldn't do what we planned to do, and I so respect that decision. This is one of those things that there is no right or wrong answer. It's hard to judge anyone for what they can personally endure. HTH!

aliceinwonderland
09-12-2005, 02:05 PM
I did despite being young and having no problems in either family--I took every test they would give me, LOL. I need as much information as possible, I do not like the unknown if I can help it at all!!

mominma
09-12-2005, 02:07 PM
I had 2 false positives, although I never went for further testing. Just went for the ultrasounds where they said everything looked fine. I did decline the test with baby #3.


Melissa
DS 9/00
DD 3/03
It's a girl! 8/30/05

juliasmom05
09-12-2005, 02:26 PM
I took the AFP test due to AMA. I was 39 at the time. It was an easier decision for me since I had already taken the first semester combined screening test (nuchal translucency and blood work) and my risk for both trisomy 18 and 21 were extremely low based upon those tests. It's not an easy decision, but for us because my risks were higher, we wanted to be prepared just in case.

ITA with a pp. You need to think about what you would do in case of a positive result and make your decision based upon that.

Marci

Mom to Julia 4/12/05

Vajrastorm
09-12-2005, 02:30 PM
We would not have terminated a pregnancy based on knowledge gained from prenatal testing. I was not willing to have an amnio, and risk hurting a healthy baby, and I didn't care to live with the anxiety if the AFP had been positive.

If amnio was risk free, I might have mad a different decision.

wagner36
09-12-2005, 02:38 PM
I am a very strong believer in the AFP. It is just a screening test, but as a screening test it is actually quite effective, especially fo neural tube defects.

So many people think the only reason you would have the test is so you could abort, and I take a lot of offense to that. In my opinion, it is essential to have the test because it could affect your birth decisions. For instance, I live in Chicago, and would deliver at a level III NICU. However, if it looked like I was at higher risk for carrying a child for downs or a neural tube defect, I would want to deliver that child at the best possible hospital for their needs. So, if it was neural tube defect, I would want to deliver at the University of Chicago hospital, which has the best pediatric neurosurgeon. I would also elect for a c-section, instead of a vaginal birth, to avoid less pressure on any exposed portions of spinal cord and giving my child a better chance of survival.

If there were a higher risk of downs, I would want to deliver at the hospital that has the best care for a downs baby, to deal with possible cleft palate issues and nursing, etc.

If you're not delivering at a Level III NICU, I think it is even more important to screen for defects - I think everyone would want to be at the best possible hospital to care for their child.

Jeanne
09-12-2005, 02:45 PM
I had it with Charlotte but not with Claire. The results were low risk with Charlotte but I couldn't stand waiting that long so since I was AMA with Claire, I just elected to have an amnio.

amazz
09-12-2005, 02:49 PM
ITA with everything you just said, Tara!!!

Angela
mama to my raisin and furry mama to Chloe
~ A baby is God's opinion that the world should go on. ~Carl Sandburg

alkagift
09-12-2005, 02:53 PM
Kristen,
We did because I wanted to use it as a gate for whether amniocentesis would be necessary. I didn't want an amnio, but I would consider one if the AFP came back positive. In my case, it was so resoundingly negative that I didn't get the amnio and didn't regret it. It would not have changed how we viewed the pregnancy but it would have given us a lot of time to prepare. I was 35 at the time.

Allison
Mommy to Matthew, who is TWO!

Are you TTC and want to share with BBB friends? Join us! http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/BBB_TTC/

SummerBaby
09-12-2005, 02:55 PM
I didn't have it done. I know 3 people who had false positives, and even though my OB uses the quad screen, which is supposedly more reliable, I knew if I got an abnormal result it wouldn't change the outcome of my pregnancy. I also had a 12 week ultrasound (which was normal), at which point they can detect many of the same problems that the AFP tests for.

That being said, I have a friend who declined the test (who didn't have a 12 week u/s) and then found out at the 20 week u/s that her baby had a serious/fatal neural tube defect.

Even with that knowledge, I think I would decline the AFP. I'm too anxious while pg to begin with, and waiting for test results would probably do more harm anxiety wise, than is worth it to me.

Val
Mom to Madeline
7/28/04

Karenn
09-12-2005, 03:54 PM
Those are the same reasons I had one the second time and also why I had an amnio the first time.

The first time I had it just because it was part of routine care. I got a false positive result which said there was a 1 in 7 chance that Colin would have downs syndrome. We followed up with the amnio, which showed everything was fine.

That first experience really stressed me out and for a long time, I vowed that I wouldn't take the test with my second pregnancy. But then, I knew that again, if there were something wrong with my child, I would want to prepare for it in every possible way.

I too have been frustrated with people assuming that my only reason for having an amnio or triple screen was so that I could terminate the pregnancy. That was never an option for us. It was all about providing for my baby, whatever the needs were, in the best way that I knew how.

aliceinwonderland
09-12-2005, 04:02 PM
ITA w/ Tara.

mclianne
09-12-2005, 04:16 PM
We had it and I wish we hadn't. It was a false positive which came back as a 1 in 40 chance of Downs. I am 38 y/o and am at higher risk, but it showed that I was significately higher than others my age. We opted for an amnio for a definite answer. Should have just done that in the first place. came back as everything OK. we wouldn't have terminated even if it was positive for down's. Just wanted to be prepared if we needed to be.

HannaAddict
09-12-2005, 04:20 PM
That is exactly why I had the screening and nuchal fold test.

Kimberly

melbb
09-12-2005, 04:36 PM
I didn't have it done because we would not have terminated the pregnancy. While peace of mind would have been nice, I also did not want to do an amnio if the test came back positive. I thought it would be better to be surprised after she is born than to possibly get a positive result and be stressed the whole pregnancy worrying about whether she was going to be "normal". I don't feel it is my decision to determine if a life is worth living, so I leave it in God's hands.

MarisaSF
09-12-2005, 04:36 PM
Congrats on your pregnancy! :)

I felt very lucky to be at a medical center that offered both AFP and NT screening. I wanted to do everything, including ultrasounds, as early as medically recommended.

Although perhaps this choice is not for you, many/most women would terminate a pregnancy not compatible with life (meaning not something like Down's, but any condition where the baby would not live one day -- and you could find this out through early testing) and I would have wanted this option as early as possible. For my friends who say they don't want to test because they'd continue a pregnancy regardless, I mention the same reasons addressed by Tara(?) plus the option of fetal surgery for certain conditions.

Some explanation of the various procedures: http://www.ucsfhealth.org/childrens/medical_services/preg/prenatal/conditions/down/diagnosis.html

Edited to clarify thought.

bcky2
09-12-2005, 04:37 PM
wonderfully said, ITA!!!!!!!!!

dowlinal
09-12-2005, 05:33 PM
I have thought of declining it both times, but did have it done. I knew that given how hard it is for us to conceive a child there was absolutely no way I am having an amnio done. (1/200 odds are just not comfortable for me) Plus, I knew that no matter what the tests said it wouldn't affect whether or not I continued the pregnancy. My ob talked me into the test stating that given my hx and risk factors I would more likely than not come up negative, and that if I came up positive we could do extra sonograms instead of an amnio. He basically convinced me based on the idea that knowing about a problem would allow us to be prepared.

pixelprincess
09-12-2005, 05:36 PM
My ob convinced me to do it. I didn't have another choice as I couldn't do an amnio due to a subchorinic hematoma that caused bleeding. My results came back negative thankfully. I would have declined the test if I had another option.

KrisM
09-12-2005, 06:20 PM
I totally agree that the other alternative isn't necessarily to abort. Your reasons are great! But, if you do get a higher risk number for neural tube defects or something, do you automatically do the c-section, or do you opt for an amnio first or what? Just curious. I didn't take the test because we had decided we wouldn't risk an amnio. I am not sure I would have just gone into a c-section for an "increased risk" of neural tube defect. Maybe by not doing the screening test, I'm just fooling myself into a sense of security with the odds.

ETA: If I were totally concerned about my risk of having one of these problems and changing hospitals as a result, I would still skip the AFP and go straight to the amnio. The AFP and quad test are only screens and give new risk numbers not positive and negatives, like an amnio can do. You can get a "false negative" on the AFP.

JBaxter
09-12-2005, 06:22 PM
I was 36 and my doc knew we were declining a amnio. We were having ( Nathan) no matter what :) He was fine and I never thought a thing about it.

SpaceGal
09-12-2005, 06:46 PM
I didn't take it. I was 27 when I got pregnant and low risk for a lot of things as well. I knew it wouldn't change our decision either so I said why bother. My 2 sis-in-laws have take it and it came back with a ton of flase positive they worried their butts off for the remainder of their pregnancies and they both ended out have two happy healthy baby boys. I sort of think hey back in the day there wasn't all these checks for babies...you basically just had your child and dealt with what he/she was born with so that's how I take it. We didn't even find out the sex either.

On a side note my son was born with two heart conditions that did require open heart surgery. Knowing that I don't think I would have bothered with the test anyway. You get what you get...and while he was in the womb everything looked perfect and I think it's just out of your hands. My next baby, if and when we do have another will have to undergo all sorts of testing just because my OB doctor and my DS's cardiologist insists one running checks but even if that baby had a defect it wouldn't change anything we would do nor does it stop us from having a family.

Anyways, good luck with your decision. Since you know there are lots of false positives...are you prepared to have those false positives worry you for the remainder of your pregnancy. I just say that since I saw my sis-in-laws worry and pray like crazy until they had their babies and it was hard.

nov04
09-12-2005, 07:09 PM
My fil is an OB, had I declined, I would have been the two-head monster for the rest of my life. I took the test for myself just so I would know what's going on. The worst thing in life for me is uncertainty. Once i know what I'm faced w/, I can start planning, preparing, reasoning, and relaxing.

buddyleebaby
09-12-2005, 07:33 PM
No. I knew I was going to keep the baby regardless, so it didn't seem important to me to know early.
That being said, they found a white spot on DD's heart at our level 2 and mentioned that it is sometime's a marker for Down's. They were unconcerned about it since there were no other markers but I was scared until I did my own research and determined on my own that she was fine. If I would have had the test, it would have saved me three days of worry, I guess.

kep
09-12-2005, 07:42 PM
Wow. You know, I really don't know if "most" women *would* choose to terminate, or just let nature take it's course. That is a pretty broad statement. We opted for the triple screen, but we refused the amnio. There was no amount of info to be gathered from it that would have been worth the high miscarriage risk to the baby. JMHO!

Kelli
Mommy to my beautiful little boy, Luke (April 2003)


"Before you were conceived I wanted you. Before you were born I loved you.
Before you were here an hour I would die for you. This is the miracle of life."
-Maureen Hawkins

smilequeen
09-12-2005, 07:53 PM
I declined, for a lot of reasons. It's difficult to describe I suppose, but it's such an inaccurate test really. I've known one person who had a baby with Downs and her AFP was very good. Everyone I know who came back high risk was fine. Seems kind of a silly test to me, and way too much stress. I didn't need anything else to worry about when I was pregnant. I would not have terminated.

JMS
09-12-2005, 08:04 PM
Tara.. thanks for pointing out some very good reasons to have the triple or quad screen. I'd hadn't thought about it so thoroughly.

marcywench
09-12-2005, 09:17 PM
DH and I discussed it and decided that we'd rather know what we can in advance. It wouldn't have affected outcome, but I feel better with knowing all that I can.

KBecks
09-12-2005, 09:25 PM
I have no idea what "pregnancy not compatible with life" means.

That said, I agree with PP. I think a big presumption is being made about what "most women" would do......

KBecks
09-12-2005, 09:25 PM
I have no idea what "pregnancy not compatible with life" means.

That said, I agree with PP. I think a big presumption is being made about what "most women" would do......

KBecks
09-12-2005, 09:29 PM
Agreed that the ability to provide better health care planning for the future baby (if health concerns are discovered) is an important thing to consider.

That said, I skipped the test b/c I was having a planned c-section anyway due to my previous health history. I'll skip the test again.

My best friend's daughter has down syndrome and her test results came back low risk, so even the best laid plans and testing don't provide any guarantees.

KBecks
09-12-2005, 09:29 PM
Agreed that the ability to provide better health care planning for the future baby (if health concerns are discovered) is an important thing to consider.

That said, I skipped the test b/c I was having a planned c-section anyway due to my previous health history. I'll skip the test again.

My best friend's daughter has down syndrome and her test results came back low risk, so even the best laid plans and testing don't provide any guarantees.

kijip
09-12-2005, 09:33 PM
We had it with Toby. It came back with no red flags and Toby was born healthy.

I am not sure if I will get it for future pregnancies or not. For me, no possible genetic disorder would result in me ever terminating a pregnancy unless it was going to save another baby's life. So if it was positive I would decline an amnio and just have the results to ponder. Does not sound like fun. I was 22 when I had it with Toby and no family history so I was/am considered pretty low risk.

kijip
09-12-2005, 09:33 PM
We had it with Toby. It came back with no red flags and Toby was born healthy.

I am not sure if I will get it for future pregnancies or not. For me, no possible genetic disorder would result in me ever terminating a pregnancy unless it was going to save another baby's life. So if it was positive I would decline an amnio and just have the results to ponder. Does not sound like fun. I was 22 when I had it with Toby and no family history so I was/am considered pretty low risk.

infocrazy
09-12-2005, 09:35 PM
I am 29 and the rest of your update describes me as well.

I passed on it. At our 21 week ultrasound, they found an intracardiac echogenic focus (IEF) on our son's heart. Although 4-5% of all babies are born with this and our doctor thought it was harmless, she also said that it was a very soft marker for Down's (everything else looked fine). Since we didn't find out until our next appointment (23 weeks) it was too late to take the Quad test (same as AFP).

Fortunately, our son was born completely healthy and wonderful but I was constantly thinking of the what ifs. It would have been nice to have the test to lessen the concern. We still wouldn't have done an amnio or had it affect the outcome of our pregnancy but its hard not to worry.

Best of luck and congratulations.

Jen

infocrazy
09-12-2005, 09:35 PM
I am 29 and the rest of your update describes me as well.

I passed on it. At our 21 week ultrasound, they found an intracardiac echogenic focus (IEF) on our son's heart. Although 4-5% of all babies are born with this and our doctor thought it was harmless, she also said that it was a very soft marker for Down's (everything else looked fine). Since we didn't find out until our next appointment (23 weeks) it was too late to take the Quad test (same as AFP).

Fortunately, our son was born completely healthy and wonderful but I was constantly thinking of the what ifs. It would have been nice to have the test to lessen the concern. We still wouldn't have done an amnio or had it affect the outcome of our pregnancy but its hard not to worry.

Best of luck and congratulations.

Jen

Smiles81
09-12-2005, 09:54 PM
I didn't have it done b/c of fear of false positive. The way the doctor made it sound to me was that it happened pretty often - so I just wasn't interested.

Reena
Mom to Dovi 3/16/04

Smiles81
09-12-2005, 09:54 PM
I didn't have it done b/c of fear of false positive. The way the doctor made it sound to me was that it happened pretty often - so I just wasn't interested.

Reena
Mom to Dovi 3/16/04

tarahsolazy
09-12-2005, 10:22 PM
Yep, I had it, and will have another one when I have another pregancy, for the reasons Tara stated. Probably will have nuchal fold measurements, too.

I am a neonatologist in a Level III NICU at a big University Children's Hospital. So that colors my experiences. I would want to know if my baby had a chromosomal defect or birth defect, if it was possible to know. Like some posters have said, despite all testing in the universe, sometimes you can't tell. There is no complete certainty or safety in parenting, and that seems to start at conception!

However, if I COULD know in advance, I'd know where to have my baby, ie home vs a hospital, commununity hospital vs University. I'd hate to be separated from my baby if I could avoid it.

Having seen parents deal with these problems with their babies, I have also found that those who were prepared seemed to assimilate the whole thing better. As though they had had time to accept the challenges their child was facing, and had started to mourn the loss of the typical child they had expected.

Notice I'm not talking about termination here, I think that there are more good reasons to think about doing the test if you would carry any pregnancy to term, regardless of any problems with the baby. It helps people plan. So I think any decision could benefit from factoring in a lot more than if you'd ever terminate your pregnancy.

There are definately lots of false positives, but that's what makes a screening test most accurate in a population with a low overall incidence of the disease(s) screened for.

squimp
09-12-2005, 10:59 PM
Just curious, what was the probability of false positives? I recall it being very low, but I can't remember.

shishamo
09-12-2005, 11:01 PM
I absolutely agree!

I had quad screen (AFP plus one more) with all three. the first two did great, my last child had false-positive result. I ended up having a terribly stressful pregnancy, lots of crying, kept having more tests, they kept coming false positive afterwards (neucal translucency test: false positive, Amnio: false positive initial result followed by a negative result, level 2 untrasound to rule out any doubt about the initial false positive amnio, another ultrasound because the first one was inconclusive, fetal-echo to rule out false positive amnio level 2 ultrasound)........

and I really did not sleep well until the third trimester. I also bled thruout the first trimester and that didn't help.

Anyway, I really really wanted to try homebirth. But after all these tests, there still was a small chance that this baby has down's. I went with the best OB that I could find, and a hospital delivery. Thank god everything went well.

Anyway, after all this, if I ever decide to have an another baby I will do the same thing.

Melanie
09-13-2005, 01:14 AM
I am your age and did not have the test. I was not going to have an amnio, and since there is a high rate of false-positives and that seems to be the "cure" for them, I saw no point.

starrynight
09-13-2005, 08:49 AM
I had it done all 3 times, to be honest I didn't know anything about the false positives until the 3rd time around and I was like whatever I had it with the other 2 might as well.

I always wonder if my 3rd child's test came back a bit funky because the doc was really weird about extra checking her spine during u/s and even made me do another one at 36 weeks because she wouldn't show us the base of her spine. She would curl up like a dog asleep on a rug and you couldn't see anything. He never said anything and she was born fine but it was weird.

If you are already having a level II u/s for other reasons you don't really need to do the test. If you aren't or you aren't sure it can't hurt to do it. It goes both ways, false positives and false negatives and if you are ok with that then get it done. I know of one person with a false neg, her child was born with down's and the test didn't catch it and somehow the markers were missed on u/s. I know a lot more false positives than false negs. Good luck to you whatever you decide.

kep
09-13-2005, 09:54 AM
These are EXCELENT points that I had not though of! Thanks for expanding my thinking. I agree! :)

Kelli
Mommy to my beautiful little boy, Luke (April 2003)


"Before you were conceived I wanted you. Before you were born I loved you.
Before you were here an hour I would die for you. This is the miracle of life."
-Maureen Hawkins

Sarah1
09-13-2005, 09:57 AM
completely agree w/all that Tara said. Very well put. I feel the same way.

smomom
09-13-2005, 12:07 PM
I didn't take it with my second pregnancy. By this time I had read enought about the AFP to convince me that this was not the right test for me. I was AMA with both children and I was very interested in knowing if there any issues with our unborn child. I had no faith in the AFP because I had heard of too many false positives. I honestly felt that I would not take the results seriously. A "positive" would not send me over the edge with worry, and a "negative" would offer me no additional reassurance that everything was ok.

I instead opted for Level 2 ultrasound which was automatically offered because of my AMA. Had that given any indication there could be a problem I would have gotten an amnio.

I wanted to be prepared for any condition, but the AFP was not the tool that I trusted to use.