This is my first pregnancy. My baby/ babies (?) are due early-mid next year. I chose not to have an ultrasound because it carries risk (i.e. increases the risk of miscarriage, learning difficulties, impaired brain development etc). I also didn’t want to screen my child(ren) for “abnormalities” (as I wouldn’t abort them anyway - I love them & want them no matter what!!). Essentially, I’m following the principles of a ‘gentle birth’ advocated by Dr [name_f]Sarah[/name_f] [name_m]Buckley[/name_m]. She advises women on the best natural birthing practices and argues that ultrasounds are not 100% safe - and more often than not - unnecessary in the vast majority of low risk pregnancies. Dr [name_m]Ben[/name_m] [name_u]Kim[/name_u] also outlines the risks associated with ultrasounds - that is, for low risk pregnancies. So, not only do I not know the sex of the baby, but I don’t know if I’m having one or more babies as twins run in my family - but I think I’m just having one this first pregnancy (judging by my weight gain/ ‘bump size’ to date).
I have chosen to have midwifery care. I also hope to have a lotus birth (i.e. where the umbilical cord/ placenta is kept attached to the baby after birth [but is treated naturally with lavender, natural salt etc & proper ‘covering/ sanitary packaging’ to keep the cord/ placenta as sterile as possible]. The cord then detaches naturally after a few days rather than cut-off straight away after birth. This is beneficial for the baby as the placenta contains 1/3 of the baby’s blood supply/ nutrient supply which should not be taken away straight after birth. (Contrary to most profit driven birthing practices in modern obstetrics, where free placentas & cord blood make for big business opportunities, the lotus birth practice enables the baby to retain & use most of the nutrients left in the placenta & cord blood supply post birth). This is undoubtedly better for the baby’s short-term & long-term health. Indeed, it is unscrupulous how many hospitals sell on the baby’s cord blood & placenta to research companies - often without the mother’s consent - especially when it is vital to the baby’s post-birth health.
Anyway, so while I was initially “pressured” to have an ultrasound by the doctor/ my partner & his family/ my family/ friends, I won’t budge on the issue. Thus, I’m “team green” - which, btw, is what my partner wants too, as he also doesn’t care what gender the child will be
I’m still searching for suitable names and I love reading the Nameberry lists & all the other Nameberry poster community lists for inspiration.
I think you should keep your options opened for baby blue and baby pink. Be old fashioned! hey, my parents would have given me a pretty eccentric name if I was a boy, and I think it’s awesome! I really like what Oceansunrise said, I never thought much about that, but I think she argues a great point!
I can totally see what you mean about ultrasounds not being 100% safe. Since they became a medical norm, no study has been done on the affects they have on the developing fetus, which is crazy.
However, I’m stunned you found a doctor willing to go ahead with your wishes. I asked to have as few U/S as possible but my doctor literally said absolutely no way, that they would have to do regular ultrasounds if and when my doctor/midwife deemed it necessary. They understood my concerns but insisted that not having scans would be more detrimental than having them. I ended up having 5 scans in total.
I find lotus birth’s interesting, but wasn’t interested in having one myself. I do subscribe to delayed cord clamping though, which is somewhat similar.
Anyway, I just wanted to say I am at one with your views and find your viewpoint refreshing! I just can’t believe you found medical practitioners willing to agree to no scans.
