Ugggh!!!

[StrongMom]

Ok, so I have always questioned whether I had true preeclampsia or PIH. I was induced at 37 weeks for pree. Supposedly my labs had come back within the pree range (though I don't place a lot of confidence in this particular lab for a lot of reasons) Well, I went to my to my gp who works in the same hospital system. I had someone ask me about participating in a study because I was anemic, but it didn't sink in at the time because I was so concern about my baby in the nicu. So I asked her about my lab results while I was at the hospital. Her reply was that they were all within the normal range for everything!!!! So it is very possible that we went through the h@#$ that was my son's delivery and his stay in the nicu for nothing!!

[alviarin]

Sorry it sounds like you had a bad experience. You could always ask the hospital for a copy of your actual lab results and get a second opinion from another doc. Be warned though, sometimes they charge a fee, and you might not want all the notes just the lab results.

I'm not a doc so I can't really comment on whether you should have been delivered early or not, but I can share my personal experience. After getting severe pre-e at 38 weeks with my first we decided to induce for "mild" pre-e at 37 weeks with my second. I barely met the diagnostic criteria (just over 300 mg proteinura in a 24 hour urine plus some high BP readings), and my pressures were actually normal day of delivery, but we decided it was safter to induce sooner than wait for me to get sicker.

Also the recent HYPITAT study ("Hypertension and Pre-eclapmsia Intervention Trial At Term") found an improvement in maternal outcomes with induction at 37 weeks for hypertension or preclampsia without a significant difference in fetal outcomes. So a lot of doctors will reccomend earlier delivery for preeclampsia or gestational hypertension.

[StrongMom]

I have asked for all of my records multiple times, I have gotten a lot of them but not all. And can't seem to get any lab reports.

I know that generally that the outcomes are 'better' for mom for early delivery, but personally I would have rather risked my health than my son's. He was obviously born too early even though officially it was 37 weeks and spent a week in the nicu. I know it is about 'balance' but for me the whole nicu experience left me with ptsd. I would never willing put a child at risk of a nicu stay again. I know my experience does differ than a lot of other peoples' experiences and I know that many people are just happy to have survived, but for me that it not enough.I know that my SIL had a very good nicu experience considering they had 28 weekers. It is so hard knowing that watchful waiting could have possibly kept him out of the nicu or at least given him some more time to develop so he didn't end up there for as long or with as many 'issues' that he did.

[angieb]

I have asked for all of my records multiple times, I have gotten a lot of them but not all. And can't seem to get any lab reports.

I know that generally that the outcomes are 'better' for mom for early delivery, but personally I would have rather risked my health than my son's. He was obviously born too early even though officially it was 37 weeks and spent a week in the nicu. I know it is about 'balance' but for me the whole nicu experience left me with ptsd. I would never willing put a child at risk of a nicu stay again. I know my experience does differ than a lot of other peoples' experiences and I know that many people are just happy to have survived, but for me that it not enough.I know that my SIL had a very good nicu experience considering they had 28 weekers. It is so hard knowing that watchful waiting could have possibly kept him out of the nicu or at least given him some more time to develop so he didn't end up there for as long or with as many 'issues' that he did.

Or you could have had a placental abruption and your son been stillborn before they could get him out- we have a person in our support group who abrupted and lost her daughter with her doctor right there. Sometimes it isn't a question of risking you vs. your son. You are both very much at risk and it can get very ugly, very quickly. We have some members here with similar stories. Too early vs. too late is a very fine line and you don't necessarily have a lot of warning or time before the situation can progress to "too late".

DS was born at 36 wks and never spent a minute in the NICU- he roomed in with us and has had no issues, our pediatrician doesn't even consider him a preemie. Not many 37 weekers need the NICU. I am sorry that your son did and that it was a traumatic experience for you. Still, I'd take a traumatic nicu experience over visiting our daughter's grave any day.

All that being said, I think questioning what happened, the decisions made, etc. is natural after the trauma of preeclampsia. I definitely did it.

[StrongMom]

I have asked for all of my records multiple times, I have gotten a lot of them but not all. And can't seem to get any lab reports.

I know that generally that the outcomes are 'better' for mom for early delivery, but personally I would have rather risked my health than my son's. He was obviously born too early even though officially it was 37 weeks and spent a week in the nicu. I know it is about 'balance' but for me the whole nicu experience left me with ptsd. I would never willing put a child at risk of a nicu stay again. I know my experience does differ than a lot of other peoples' experiences and I know that many people are just happy to have survived, but for me that it not enough.I know that my SIL had a very good nicu experience considering they had 28 weekers. It is so hard knowing that watchful waiting could have possibly kept him out of the nicu or at least given him some more time to develop so he didn't end up there for as long or with as many 'issues' that he did.

Or you could have had a placental abruption and your son been stillborn before they could get him out- we have a person in our support group who abrupted and lost her daughter with her doctor right there. Sometimes it isn't a question of risking you vs. your son. You are both very much at risk and it can get very ugly, very quickly. We have some members here with similar stories. Too early vs. too late is a very fine line and you don't necessarily have a lot of warning or time before the situation can progress to "too late"e

DS was born at 36 wks and never spent a minute in the NICU- he roomed in with us and has had no issues, our pediatrician doesn't even consider him a preemie. Not many 37 weekers need the NICU. I am sorry that your son did and that it was a traumatic experience for you. Still, I'd take a traumatic nicu experience over visiting our daughter's grave any day.

All that being said, I think questioning what happened, the decisions made, etc. is natural after the trauma of preeclampsia. I definitely did it.

Actually there were many, many 37 weekers in the level III nicu where I was. The reason that there is such a push on right now for no deliveries before 38 weeks unless absolutely necessary is because many of these 'late preterm' babies do end up in the nicu. The March of Dimes has done a lot of great research in this area. Many of these babies do show 'soft' neurological impairment signs as well when they reach school age. They don't rise to the signs of a disorder and the child usually has normal intelligence, so their school work isn't necessarily affected but there are signs that there are some neurological differences.

And yes, I know that many people would just rather come out alive-- but living with ptsd from the experience affects the quality of life so much that some times the alternatives seem better, which is why you see such a high suicide rate among those suffering from it. Every relationship in my life has suffered tremendously from it, including the one with my son. That is part of the reason that rather that the health care professionals need to present everything in the BRAND. Women need to get the choice to decide based upon those risk factors that they find most important to control for with those risks and their related probability presented in a non-emotion driven way.

[mom29]

My youngest was born at 33 weeks and I had hoped to get further in the pregnancy. I second guessed the decision even though I knew it was in the best interest for both of us.

I don't know what happened during your son's nicu stay, but I'm sorry it was such a bad time for you.

[JB]

Generally babies born at 37 weeks are not automatically taken to the NICU (that is considered full term), so your baby definitely had issues that required NICU care. It is difficult to say whether those issues were due to an early induction or due to your hypertension/preeclampsia. It is quite possible that your hypertension/PE was affecting your baby's health more than it was affecting yours. After my baby was born analysis of my placenta showed that it had begun to deteriorate and was probably not producing enough nutrition. They also said that it probably would have abrupted if I hadn't delivered when I did. This is why in my current pregnancy they are doing twice-weekly nonstress tests, weekly fluid checks, and monthly growth checks on the baby.. sometimes you as the mom can have no outward symptoms but your baby is being affected.

I am sorry you had a bad NICU experience. Did you have problems with the staff, or was your PTSD simply due to the stress of having a sick baby? My daughter was in the NICU for seven weeks after she was born at 29+6 weeks. It was quite terrifying at times (her lung collapsed twice, she was on and off ventilators and chest tubes, etc.), but the nurses and doctors and other parents were so wonderful and really helped us get through everything.

[mom29]

[quote
Every relationship in my life has suffered tremendously from it, including the one with my son. That is part of the reason that rather that the health care professionals need to present everything in the BRAND. Women need to get the choice to decide based upon those risk factors that they find most important to control for with those risks and their related probability presented in a non-emotion driven way.[/quote]

What is the BRAND? Am I understanding correctly that you feel women should get to make the final decision regarding delivery based upon risk factors and what they are comfortable with? Our OB's or MFM's have one thing we mothers do not, extensive training and lots of experience managing mothers & unborn babies in high risk situations. They are responsible to keep both safe. At a certain point the risks of an early birth outweigh the risks of continuing a high risk pregnancy.

I remember my MFM telling me anything after 32 weeks was frosting on the cake when I was admitted at 30 weeks. That didn't mean my baby would encounter no difficulties, but that he preferred an early birth with resolvable issues vs. me having a seizure or stroke and suffering permanent damage. Also, the doctors take into account how you are feeling (swelling, headache, visual disturbances, increased bp), not just the lab results.

I don't know any mother who has had an early delivery not wonder if she could have stayed pregnant longer or done something different. I thought I wasn't feeling "that bad", but when looked at my old messages to my friends and my posts on a message board I realized I had forgotten just how bad I really was feeling. It really took me awhile to get past the second guessing and what ifs. Staying home from Oct. to April was hard and having a preemie who was gaining weight slowly the first few months was nerve wracking.

[Guest]

Regarding the March of Dimes study:
"... The reduction in early elective delivery reduced NICU admissions, reduced both the induction rate and the C-section rate, and ... presumably reduced costs. However, these benefits were achieved at a very steep price. The stillbirth rate increased from 2.5 to 9.1 per 10,000 term pregnancies. Instead of 3 stillbirths between 37-39 weeks among 12,000 patients, there were 11 stillbirths between 37-39 weeks among a similar number of patients after reduction in early elective deliveries"

My youngest was born at 33 weeks and I had hoped to get further in the pregnancy. I second guessed the decision even though I knew it was in the best interest for both of us.

I don't know what happened during your son's nicu stay, but I'm sorry it was such a bad time for you.

Those are still pretty remote numbers an increase of possibility from 0.00025% to 0.00091 yes that is a big increase but still very remote possibility.

I would NEVER click on a link of someone who publicly attacks children (no matter what you think of their parents), who thinks that women should stay with an abuser no matter what the cost to her, who purports that epidurals have no side effects, or harasses and has her followers harass people with different opinions especially while the labor. Additionally, someone who has been kicked off of scientific sites because she was unable to provide anything but her opinion or papers with her opinions does not hold any value in my book.

[akoons]

Generally babies born at 37 weeks are not automatically taken to the NICU (that is considered full term), so your baby definitely had issues that required NICU care. It is difficult to say whether those issues were due to an early induction or due to your hypertension/preeclampsia. It is quite possible that your hypertension/PE was affecting your baby's health more than it was affecting yours. After my baby was born analysis of my placenta showed that it had begun to deteriorate and was probably not producing enough nutrition. They also said that it probably would have abrupted if I hadn't delivered when I did. This is why in my current pregnancy they are doing twice-weekly nonstress tests, weekly fluid checks, and monthly growth checks on the baby.. sometimes you as the mom can have no outward symptoms but your baby is being affected.

I am sorry you had a bad NICU experience. Did you have problems with the staff, or was your PTSD simply due to the stress of having a sick baby? My daughter was in the NICU for seven weeks after she was born at 29+6 weeks. It was quite terrifying at times (her lung collapsed twice, she was on and off ventilators and chest tubes, etc.), but the nurses and doctors and other parents were so wonderful and really helped us get through everything.

It depends on who's defining 'full-term'. There has been a push to label 34-37 weekers as 'late pretermers'. It depends on the hospital whether those kids automatically go to the nicu or not. My son definitely showed the signs of the' late pretermers'. The first part of his 7 day stay was due to issues he had with the induction itself, the drugs that they used, and my reaction to the epidural. HOWEVER he had the transient breathing issue that pretermers have which was what sent him there asap. The second half of the stay, all of those issue cleared up and we were left dealing with issues relating to being a late pre-termer. They probably wouldn't have been pronounced enough to warrant a nicu stay initially, however since he was already there they wouldn't release him with those issues. Whether or not a 37 weeker has difficulties seems to have more to do with whether or not they arrived via spontaneous labor or induction/c section, which does add a whole new dimension to the statistics. All of the testing on the placenta and everything else related to him came back normal with the exception of affects of the induction and/or prematurity.

The main problems I had revolved around the staff, however having to see your child in such a state knowing that it possibly could have been avoided given watchful waiting definitely did not help.