First Appointments

vballgirl78

I went in yesterday for a beta and progesterone check. I'll have that repeated next Wed. First u/s is on Sept. 17 and I'll have another one two weeks later. Normally my OB doesn't see patients until 8 weeks but due to my previous loss and secondary infertility we are doing frequent checks in the beginning (mainly just to reassure me).

vballgirl78

Oops... I just realized I already answered this question. Can I blame pregnancy brain this early?

Pink724

I had blood drawn to check hcg and progesterone levels last Thursday. I had low progesterone with L so I had to be on suppositories all of first tri. However, my levels looked good this time around and I am going back on Friday to check levels again and see what we can see on the ultrasound. With my history of loss, my OB is letting me be very closely monitored at first which puts me more at ease.

kcmomz3

I had 3 betas last week, and our first ultrasound is on this Friday (sept 5). We can't wait and are ready to pass this milestone. 2 previous early losses, so we are praying this is our miracle baby

benmel31

I called and was told they would send me paperwork to get bloodwork done.  After that, I will schedule an appointment with the nurse and for a dating U/S at 8 weeks.  So I should be going in the last week in September.

MrsKindy40

My first appt is scheduled for Oct 1 at 8w2d. I had blood work done this morning to check hcg and progesterone.

Lomcmuffin

I had my first appointment on Friday the 29th (13dpo) just with my family doctor. He ordered a bunch of blood work and a urine test. He wants to see me back in 3 weeks. I filled out an intake form for the midwife and I'm excited to hear from them!

Lomcmuffin

momtosam said:

PenguinMG said:

katnhiding said:

Okay my first appointment is 9/17. They are going off of my LMP which I'm going to need to correct, because I ovulate around CD 19 and those 5 days will make a big difference with a scheduled c-section. I'll take the early appointment though.

Same! 9/17 will be my first appt.

I didn't ovulate until CD 21, so that's going to put me a week later than LMP, but I was more than happy to take an earlier appt.

me too! They are scheduling based on LMP. I tried to correct when talking to scheduler, but she said they would correct after first ultra sound. I am happy for the earlier appointment. Based off my LMP my due date would be Aprill 11th. Bahahaha! WRONG. I ovulated (most likely) CD34/35. So almost 3 weeks off. 

I'm in the same boat as you, I ovulated on CD37, so my dates are messed up too!

soralette

Lomcmuffin said:

PenguinMG said:

katnhiding said:

Okay my first appointment is 9/17. They are going off of my LMP which I'm going to need to correct, because I ovulate around CD 19 and those 5 days will make a big difference with a scheduled c-section. I'll take the early appointment though.

Same! 9/17 will be my first appt.

I didn't ovulate until CD 21, so that's going to put me a week later than LMP, but I was more than happy to take an earlier appt.

me too! They are scheduling based on LMP. I tried to correct when talking to scheduler, but she said they would correct after first ultra sound. I am happy for the earlier appointment. Based off my LMP my due date would be Aprill 11th. Bahahaha! WRONG. I ovulated (most likely) CD34/35. So almost 3 weeks off. 

I'm in the same boat as you, I ovulated on CD37, so my dates are messed up too!

Oh, man. This happened with me on my first pregnancy -- it was HELL getting them to accept that, no, we really should be using the EDD based off of when I actually ovulated, not my LMP, given that I've been charting reliably to avoid pregnancy for years and got pregnant on my first cycle trying. Clearly, I know when the heck I'm ovulating.

I thought I had them understanding that.

But when I got to the hospital for delivery of #1, they were like, "So your duedate was $WrongDate, right?" *facepalm*

I hope you guys have less trouble than I did!

One of the reasons I picked the midwife I'm going with was talking to her about the above issue -- she's perfectly happy to take the due date I tell her and go with it!

heagen

I'm switching offices from when I had my son. My first appointment with the "new" doctor (he performed my c-section as my midwives didn't do them) is on 9/23.

I believe I will be 8 or 9 weeks.

centralperk

I have an appt schedule for 9-2 for an early scan to make sure this pregnancy is in the right place. I will most likely have a follow up scan between 9 and 10 weeks. 

Lomcmuffin

soralette said:

Lomcmuffin said:

momtosam said:

PenguinMG said:

katnhiding said:

Okay my first appointment is 9/17. They are going off of my LMP which I'm going to need to correct, because I ovulate around CD 19 and those 5 days will make a big difference with a scheduled c-section. I'll take the early appointment though.

Same! 9/17 will be my first appt.

I didn't ovulate until CD 21, so that's going to put me a week later than LMP, but I was more than happy to take an earlier appt.

me too! They are scheduling based on LMP. I tried to correct when talking to scheduler, but she said they would correct after first ultra sound. I am happy for the earlier appointment. Based off my LMP my due date would be Aprill 11th. Bahahaha! WRONG. I ovulated (most likely) CD34/35. So almost 3 weeks off. 

I'm in the same boat as you, I ovulated on CD37, so my dates are messed up too!




Oh, man. This happened with me on my first pregnancy -- it was HELL getting them to accept that, no, we really should be using the EDD based off of when I actually ovulated, not my LMP, given that I've been charting reliably to avoid pregnancy for years and got pregnant on my first cycle trying. Clearly, I know when the heck I'm ovulating.

I thought I had them understanding that.

But when I got to the hospital for delivery of #1, they were like, "So your duedate was $WrongDate, right?" *facepalm*

I hope you guys have less trouble than I did!

One of the reasons I picked the midwife I'm going with was talking to her about the above issue -- she's perfectly happy to take the due date I tell her and go with it!

I hope I don't have that problem! It's weird seeing 4 weeks pregnant when I know I'm really only 2..my brain just doesn't want to get that. We are planning to use midwives too!!

annarach

First appt is scheduled for 9/22. I've already been in for bloodwork due to a history of ectopic pregnancy. It'll be pants down, piac, lots of information and done.

cboydston1

My first appointment isn't until October 6th! With my first, they didn't see my until 10 weeks either, so I expected it.  I'd like to get in earlier, but I'll try my best to be patient!

gypsyheart85

I'll be calling my midwife tomorrow to set it up! I am 4w 1d so I imagine another few weeks or so.

kat0217

@Lomcmuffin‌ the way pregnancy is dated, you're considered 2 weeks on the day you ovulate. So 2 weeks after your ovulation date, you're 4 weeks pregnant.

Luckily, when I told my midwife I knew my ovulation day, she used that instead of my LMP and came up with the same due date I already knew. That's when I knew she was a keeper.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

soralette

Just got my first appointment scheduled: October 3rd! At 8w4d, there's a chance of hearing the baby's heartbeat on the doppler, too.

lindsey85d

Mine is scheduled for 9/17 and I will be 7wk 2d! Do you think it will be possible to hear a heartbeat then? We are holding off on telling our family until after the first exam, and the rest of our friends until Oct just to be sure.

23Tez23

My first appointment is for 10 weeks. The receptionist asked my age first (36) and then chose the date. Do you think it's so late because of my age? If I want an u/s to test for nuchal translucency, should I call back and request it, since I might not get it right away after the appointment? Canadian health care system means they could be booking 3 weeks in advance, which might take me out of the nuchal window?

MusicGirl630

I had two beta tests to confirm pregnancy and make sure HCG levels were rising appropriately. Progesterone also checked for same reason. First ultra sound is on the 4th (week 6 ) and I'm so excited (not that we'll see too much). We conceived naturally, but were in the diagnostic processes with an RE, so I am still under their care. I think I'm being monitored closely for that reason, also, I am 37 and have a factor five lieden mutation. Hang in there, I can't imagine waiting until 10 weeks to see what's going on in there!

kat0217

My first (and only) ultrasound will be between 18 & 20 weeks, so not until the first 2 weeks of December. It sounds like a long time to wait but I'm very thankful my midwife takes this approach. There simply isn't enough research to show the effect of ultrasound waves on developing cells for it to be declared safe, and for most women, there's no medical reason for it, especially early on. There are certainly exceptions to this where the benefit outweighs the risk, but those are exceptions, not the rule. Plus, the way the timing works out, I'll be able to have my ultrasound on my 2nd wedding anniversary. Since my husband will be over 500 miles away, I can't think of a better way to celebrate than to see our baby for the first time!

twinkletoes3126

kat0217 said:

My first (and only) ultrasound will be between 18 & 20 weeks, so not until the first 2 weeks of December. It sounds like a long time to wait but I'm very thankful my midwife takes this approach. There simply isn't enough research to show the effect of ultrasound waves on developing cells for it to be declared safe, and for most women, there's no medical reason for it, especially early on. There are certainly exceptions to this where the benefit outweighs the risk, but those are exceptions, not the rule. Plus, the way the timing works out, I'll be able to have my ultrasound on my 2nd wedding anniversary. Since my husband will be over 500 miles away, I can't think of a better way to celebrate than to see our baby for the first time!

Maybe I'm just hormonal, but this comment definitely rubs me the wrong way. My practice does 4 routine ultrasounds, and when I was pregnant with DS I had many more due to bleeding. I get ultrasounds because it is what my doctor recommends. I feel as though this comment comes off a little judgy, just my opinion.

OnceInLoveWithAmy

twinkletoes3126 said:

My first (and only) ultrasound will be between 18 & 20 weeks, so not until the first 2 weeks of December. It sounds like a long time to wait but I'm very thankful my midwife takes this approach. There simply isn't enough research to show the effect of ultrasound waves on developing cells for it to be declared safe, and for most women, there's no medical reason for it, especially early on. There are certainly exceptions to this where the benefit outweighs the risk, but those are exceptions, not the rule. Plus, the way the timing works out, I'll be able to have my ultrasound on my 2nd wedding anniversary. Since my husband will be over 500 miles away, I can't think of a better way to celebrate than to see our baby for the first time!

Maybe I'm just hormonal, but this comment definitely rubs me the wrong way. My practice does 4 routine ultrasounds, and when I was pregnant with DS I had many more due to bleeding. I get ultrasounds because it is what my doctor recommends. I feel as though this comment comes off a little judgy, just my opinion.

My holistic chiropractor said the same thing to me while I was pregnant in February/March.  I believe her exact words were 'you can boil your baby'.  I just nodded my head and smiled.  

Anyway, I've already been to the RE twice, and I go again on Friday for more betas and an ultrasound.  After that, I believe I go weekly to make sure everything is forming correctly since I've had two previous losses. Then I'll get handed over to the OB around 9 or 10 weeks.  

kat0217

twinkletoes3126 said:

kat0217 said:

My first (and only) ultrasound will be between 18 & 20 weeks, so not until the first 2 weeks of December. It sounds like a long time to wait but I'm very thankful my midwife takes this approach. There simply isn't enough research to show the effect of ultrasound waves on developing cells for it to be declared safe, and for most women, there's no medical reason for it, especially early on. There are certainly exceptions to this where the benefit outweighs the risk, but those are exceptions, not the rule. Plus, the way the timing works out, I'll be able to have my ultrasound on my 2nd wedding anniversary. Since my husband will be over 500 miles away, I can't think of a better way to celebrate than to see our baby for the first time!

Maybe I'm just hormonal, but this comment definitely rubs me the wrong way. My practice does 4 routine ultrasounds, and when I was pregnant with DS I had many more due to bleeding. I get ultrasounds because it is what my doctor recommends. I feel as though this comment comes off a little judgy, just my opinion.

I'm sorry it rubbed you the wrong way. That certainly wasn't my intention. Until fairly recently I had no idea that ultrasounds aren't guaranteed to be safe. I thought there are probably lots of others out there who are unaware of this also and might benefit from looking into it. I'm not judgmental of those who have multiple ultrasounds. I simply want to encourage people to research it more. Lots of doctors suggest things that are not medically necessary (such as medically unnecessary induction & c-sections to fit in with the doctor's schedule). My old OBGYN told me I would need a C-section based on the size of my uterus before I was even thinking about TTC (she was an absolute nightmare). Unfortunately, a lot of women feel they can blindly trust doctors when they do not always have your best interests in mind.

beachhippiemama

Scheduling tomorrow. Hoping to have my first appointment last week of September/first of October. That would put me at 8 weeks.

maybebride

kat0217 said:

My first (and only) ultrasound will be between 18 & 20 weeks, so not until the first 2 weeks of December. It sounds like a long time to wait but I'm very thankful my midwife takes this approach. There simply isn't enough research to show the effect of ultrasound waves on developing cells for it to be declared safe, and for most women, there's no medical reason for it, especially early on. There are certainly exceptions to this where the benefit outweighs the risk, but those are exceptions, not the rule. Plus, the way the timing works out, I'll be able to have my ultrasound on my 2nd wedding anniversary. Since my husband will be over 500 miles away, I can't think of a better way to celebrate than to see our baby for the first time!

Maybe I'm just hormonal, but this comment definitely rubs me the wrong way. My practice does 4 routine ultrasounds, and when I was pregnant with DS I had many more due to bleeding. I get ultrasounds because it is what my doctor recommends. I feel as though this comment comes off a little judgy, just my opinion.

I'm sorry it rubbed you the wrong way. That certainly wasn't my intention. Until fairly recently I had no idea that ultrasounds aren't guaranteed to be safe. I thought there are probably lots of others out there who are unaware of this also and might benefit from looking into it. I'm not judgmental of those who have multiple ultrasounds. I simply want to encourage people to research it more. Lots of doctors suggest things that are not medically necessary (such as medically unnecessary induction & c-sections to fit in with the doctor's schedule). My old OBGYN told me I would need a C-section based on the size of my uterus before I was even thinking about TTC (she was an absolute nightmare). Unfortunately, a lot of women feel they can blindly trust doctors when they do not always have your best interests in mind.

While I don't think you had bad intentions with your comments, you really need to be careful with what you say and how you say it. There are a lot of first time moms here who can worry over hearing things like that. Every woman should discuss with her own doctors any concerns about ultrasounds (or anything for that matter). 

For me, my doctor wanted an u/s at 8 weeks, which is her norm. It turned out to be a very good thing because it gave us a base for knowing that my DS was "growing big" from day one (was charting and had been TTC for 2.5 years, so there was no doubt on his date of conception). I went on to have my 20-week u/s then three more prior to birth because we needed to check his size and if it weren't for those, we would not have been able to make a determination on his birth that could have physically effected him for the rest of his life.

So, while your information may not be wrong, there is also no proof that u/s are unsafe for developing babies. I have a healthy, smart, fun toddler and while I will not seek ultrasounds (I will be happy to have my two this time), I will consider the good of child based on my doctor's advice because I trust her 100%. If you do not trust your doctor, find a new one.

RhythmeKrow

I'll be calling tomorrow.  Since I don't have a LMP to go off of, we'll probably need to do a dating ultrasound.  Doubt the midwife will be thrilled to just go with my guess.

twinkletoes3126

@kat0217‌ You can do and believe whatever you would like. I choose to trust my doctor who believes that their are many benefits of an 8 week ultrasound such as checking for the number of babies, ruling out ectopic pregnancy, making sure that the baby is measuring the number of weeks that the mother believes she is, etc. I just felt like you were judging those of us who decide to follow our Doctors orders.

kat0217

maybebride said:

kat0217 said:

twinkletoes3126 said:

kat0217 said:

My first (and only) ultrasound will be between 18 & 20 weeks, so not until the first 2 weeks of December. It sounds like a long time to wait but I'm very thankful my midwife takes this approach. There simply isn't enough research to show the effect of ultrasound waves on developing cells for it to be declared safe, and for most women, there's no medical reason for it, especially early on. There are certainly exceptions to this where the benefit outweighs the risk, but those are exceptions, not the rule. Plus, the way the timing works out, I'll be able to have my ultrasound on my 2nd wedding anniversary. Since my husband will be over 500 miles away, I can't think of a better way to celebrate than to see our baby for the first time!

Maybe I'm just hormonal, but this comment definitely rubs me the wrong way. My practice does 4 routine ultrasounds, and when I was pregnant with DS I had many more due to bleeding. I get ultrasounds because it is what my doctor recommends. I feel as though this comment comes off a little judgy, just my opinion.

I'm sorry it rubbed you the wrong way. That certainly wasn't my intention. Until fairly recently I had no idea that ultrasounds aren't guaranteed to be safe. I thought there are probably lots of others out there who are unaware of this also and might benefit from looking into it. I'm not judgmental of those who have multiple ultrasounds. I simply want to encourage people to research it more. Lots of doctors suggest things that are not medically necessary (such as medically unnecessary induction & c-sections to fit in with the doctor's schedule). My old OBGYN told me I would need a C-section based on the size of my uterus before I was even thinking about TTC (she was an absolute nightmare). Unfortunately, a lot of women feel they can blindly trust doctors when they do not always have your best interests in mind.

While I don't think you had bad intentions with your comments, you really need to be careful with what you say and how you say it. There are a lot of first time moms here who can worry over hearing things like that. Every woman should discuss with her own doctors any concerns about ultrasounds (or anything for that matter). 

For me, my doctor wanted an u/s at 8 weeks, which is her norm. It turned out to be a very good thing because it gave us a base for knowing that my DS was "growing big" from day one (was charting and had been TTC for 2.5 years, so there was no doubt on his date of conception). I went on to have my 20-week u/s then three more prior to birth because we needed to check his size and if it weren't for those, we would not have been able to make a determination on his birth that could have physically effected him for the rest of his life.

So, while your information may not be wrong, there is also no proof that u/s are unsafe for developing babies. I have a healthy, smart, fun toddler and while I will not seek ultrasounds (I will be happy to have my two this time), I will consider the good of child based on my doctor's advice because I trust her 100%. If you do not trust your doctor, find a new one.

So, basically, I'm not allowed to answer posts that might involve me sharing an opinion since mine differs from the mainstream? That isn't fair on any level. My initial post (that started this line of being "offended") was to say when my ultrasound will be since that's the topic. I felt the need to explain the reasoning immediately instead of waiting for people to say,"OMG, why so long?!" since that's the typical reaction. So I explained my reasoning. Why is it considered offensive for me to explain why I don't agree with certain approaches (based on actual research), but not offensive for other people to say things against natural birth (which people do ALLLL the time)? There's no way to explain natural approaches and reasons behind them without someone feeling offended, even if every precaution is taken to try to NOT sound offensive. I didn't say anything about women who DO get multiple ultrasounds; I explained why I will NOT. Huge difference.

FYI - I'm also a first time mom. Information like this should be cause for research, not fear. We are not helpless in terms of our pregnancies. One of my primary points is that you shouldn't put 100% faith in your doctor without doing any research, so asking your doctor doesn't always help. It also isn't something that a lot of women know about, so how is it possible to raise awareness without actually talking about it?

It seems like you only read half of what I said and therefore misunderstood a lot of it. Why are women so afraid of natural approaches that someone else merely talking about it makes them feel offended or attacked?

twinkletoes3126

@kat0217‌ This is what bothered me "There simply isn't enough research to show the effect of ultrasound waves on developing cells for it to be declared safe, and for most women, there's no medical reason for it, especially early on. There are certainly exceptions to this where the benefit outweighs the risk, but those are exceptions, not the rule." You sound preachy and very judgmental. Some of us believe there are benefits to an early ultrasound.
Edited to add: No one was implying you can't share your opinion. You made your opinions seem like facts and like they were the right choice for everyone, that's when the line between an opinion and judgement gets crossed.

kat0217

twinkletoes3126 said:

@kat0217‌ This is what bothered me "There simply isn't enough research to show the effect of ultrasound waves on developing cells for it to be declared safe, and for most women, there's no medical reason for it, especially early on. There are certainly exceptions to this where the benefit outweighs the risk, but those are exceptions, not the rule." You sound preachy and very judgmental. Some of us believe there are benefits to an early ultrasound.


Edited to add: No one was implying you can't share your opinion. You made your opinions seem like facts and like they were the right choice for everyone, that's when the line between an opinion and judgement gets crossed.

This was almost word for word what I read when I researched the topic. Sharing information to help others out is not "being judgmental" and I'm sorry you see it that way.

If I discovered tomorrow that wearing the color purple increased the risk of MC (yes, this is a ridiculous example, only to make a point), would sharing that information with you be considered judgmental? How are people supposed to share information if people take it as a personal attack? Especially when the whole reason I said what I said was to explain MY reasoning, not to say, "Everyone should be exactly like me."

twinkletoes3126

@kat0217‌ I know what you are saying and I honestly don't believe you were trying to be offensive. I just think your choice of wording was poor. To say that their is no medical reason for most women to have an early ultrasound is a pretty bold statement considering many doctors disagree with you.

kat0217

twinkletoes3126 said:

@kat0217‌ I know what you are saying and I honestly don't believe you were trying to be offensive. I just think your choice of wording was poor. To say that their is no medical reason for most women to have an early ultrasound is a pretty bold statement considering many doctors disagree with you.

Many doctors also say that Pitocin is safe despite overwhelming research to the contrary. They also say women should lay flat on their backs during labor and delivery despite evidence that this is typically the worst possible position. I could go on for hours, but I think I've made my point. Doctors are not gods, nor are they perfect. If all doctors were magically right, they wouldn't have so many differing opinions. And that conclusion that you find so troublesome came from the research, not from my personal opinion. It also says MOST, not all.

Again, sorry what I said upset you, but I'm getting pretty upset by the fact that any opinion based on a natural approach is seen as judgmental.

kat0217

twinkletoes3126 said:

@kat0217‌ You can do and believe whatever you would like. I choose to trust my doctor who believes that their are many benefits of an 8 week ultrasound such as checking for the number of babies, ruling out ectopic pregnancy, making sure that the baby is measuring the number of weeks that the mother believes she is, etc. I just felt like you were judging those of us who decide to follow our Doctors orders.

You can also do and believe whatever you would like; I never said otherwise. I simply shared information that I recently learned. Just like you choose to trust your doctor, I choose to trust the combination of my midwife's recommendations and my own research on the topic. I feel like you are judging me for trusting my midwife and research.

See how that works? The post you were offended by was one where I shared MY reasoning (and my midwife's reasoning) for less ultrasounds. My personal reasoning. Not my advice for you. Not what 100% of people should do. I didn't say, "Hey everyone, do this or you're a horrible person." You took offense at the fact that I explained MY personal situation. If I had left it unexplained and simply said, "I won't have an ultrasound until 18-20 weeks," people would have been commenting that my baby was in danger or at the very least wondering what the hell was wrong with me and/or my caregiver. That isn't fair. Period. Our bodies were made to do this. It's ridiculous that people are treated like criminals and crazy people for allowing our bodies to do what they're meant to do without trying to interfere every step of the way.

twinkletoes3126

@kat0217‌ I am not going to argue with you, we obviously disagree and can leave it at that. I would just appreciate if you would try to not act like your opinion is a fact.

kat0217

@twinkletoes3126 I never said my opinion was fact. The information I gave was a combination of research and the approach many, if not most, midwives take, not my opinion. There is PLENTY of research to back it up. Sharing valuable information is not a reason to attack me. I'm happy to not argue with you. I'd be even happier if people here did not act like natural birth is....unnatural, for lack of a better word, and attack me for it.

twinkletoes3126

@kat0217‌ How did I attack you? And when did I act like unnatural birth is unnatural?

kat0217

@twinkletoes3126 This entire charade has been an attack on me for sharing MY reasoning for MY late ultrasound. I was accused of being judgmental despite never saying anything about anyone else's choice and only talking about my own.

As far as acting like natural birth is unnatural, that has been more of an overall feeling I've gotten from several posts on this website, not from you specifically. I did not mean to make it seem like that feeling was from you specifically.

Edited to add tag.

twinkletoes3126

@kat0217‌ I said nothing about your choice to have a later ultrasound, I could care less. I replied to your comment that most women don't need early ultrasounds, which is attacking my choice.