- Pregnancy
- Baby & Toddler
- Parents
- Getting Pregnant
- Baby Names
- Product Reviews
-
Registry
- Community
-
More
Want a personalized experience?
Download the free app
April 2013 Moms
PSUBecky23
member
Refusing GD Test
PSUBecky23
member
I'm not saying I'm going to refuse GD test but I'm just curious if anyone has refused it or plans to and what the reasons were.
This discussion has been closed.
Re: Refusing GD Test
No!! I would only refuse it if had reason to believe I had it and wanted to begin testing my blood sugar throughout the day.
GD is very dangerous for a baby if left untreated. Yikes.
I was going to ask about that. I am NOT into all this over medicating that seems to be all the rage now. I am going to get this test if it means my doc won't see me anymore however I am going to opt out if I am able.
To each there own though, it's your body.
Why would someone refuse a test that can show something possibly harmful to the baby that you can end by changing your diet?
I haven't ever heard of someone refusing... perhaps unless they've done it 20 times and their doctor makes them continue to come in and test because they are overweight or something (which SLIGHTLY increases chances, but only slightly, and I would be very bothered if my doctor made me test more frequently simply because of my weight).
It's your baby's body too. Why would you be opposed to the test? There's no medication involved in testing. There may be a change in diet and potential for need to regulate your sugar, but diet would likely be first.
I understand the whole "avoid medication if it is not necessary" standpoint, but refusing the GD test is going a bit far, don't you think? Uncontrolled GD can put your health, and the baby's health at risk! Maybe you should do some research into the effects of uncontrolled GD on your unborn child before you make this decision.
BFP #1: 08/17/2012 DD1 born 05/01/2013
BFP #2: 07/31/2015 M/C 09/23/2015 (11.5 weeks)
This.
BFP #2, 12/12/11, m/c 12/25/11
BFP #3, 3/09/12, CP 3/10/12
BFP #4, 7/22/12, DD#2 born 4/2013
I'm also on the all natural/crunchy side of pretty much every parenting choice, but I don't see the downfalls of this test. You drink sugar water and then pee in a cup. That's not medicating, it's just checking to see if you have one of the more common and treatable potential side effects of pregnancy.
There was a post about this topic over in the natural birth board not too long ago, I believe. (don't quote me...I could be wrong)
I did not have the 1st tri bloodwork (quad screen, nuchal fold test) done for personal reasons. However, this is one test that I can't see refusing. It's simple, relatively painless, and there really isn't that "false positive" / unnecessary treatment/testing scare issue involved at all. If you have GD, you have GD, and there are real risks to you and your baby that should be known about and dealt with.
I've ever only had to do it once per pregnancy, though. I don't know that I'd refuse, but I'd be a little miffed if I had to do it over and over again.
ACOG guidelines no longer recommend testing for all pregnant women. Guidelines state that women who are under 25, have no family history, no personal history, and are otherwise low risk do not necessarily need the test.
I did have to do it twice last time, once in the first tri and once in the third. They wanted me to do it right away because of a history of diabetes in my family (nothing about me made them suspect). It was annoying to have to do it while sick but two times wasn't a huge deal at all and it was just like having to do any other semi unpleasant pregnancy related thing.
Actually, according the National Institutes of Health:
Your baby is more likely to have periods of low blood sugar (hypoglycemia) during the first few days of life.
Mothers with gestational diabetes have an increased risk for high blood pressure during pregnancy.
There is a slightly increased risk of the baby dying when the mother has untreated gestational diabetes. Controlling blood sugar levels reduces this risk.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0001898/
My best friend refused it like 10 years ago when pregnant with her son.
And then had an 11 lb baby.
Vaginally.
And her body has never been the same.
I would not refuse this test.
It was a stupid choice and she admits that now.
Huh? How is GD testing over medicating???
What's missing from this is that you don't actually know that she in fact had GD, do you? Many, many people without GD have big babies. Just like many people with GD don't have big babies.
Thats what I don't understand. You drink syrup and have blood drawn. If you have GD, you usually just change what your eating with the guidance of your OB. Where is the medicine? I cannot believe that anyone would be selfish enough or have their head so high in the clouds that they would not have this test done. BABY COMES FIRST!!!!!
Wait... you pee in a cup? I was told that I will be having my blood drawn. Pee in a cup sounds much easier, but I believe they're actually going to be taking my blood.
Nope, sorry for getting you excited! It's been three years now and with all of the blood draws and peeing in cups I just got them mixed up. I'm pretty sure this one is a blood draw.
FWIW, my test is scheduled for Friday.
I've just read some actual, legitimate medical articles that got me thinking.
Finally, from what I understand, the major treatment for GD is limiting fat intake and carbs and eating smaller, more frequent meals and engaging in regular exercise. We should all be doing that anyway regardless of if we have GD, shouldn't we?.
We all should be doing that whether we are pregnant or not but the reality is that most of us don't. If you are told you have a disease that requires a change in diet it makes people take it more seriously than just knowing they should. I'm not saying that's right but it is what it is.
Very true...but look at the obesity rates in this country - doesn't seem to be working, does it? Sometimes a good scare is in order (ie: an actual diagnosis).
And I'm guilty - I was very fit, active and ate great until I got pregnant. While I didn't exactly say "I'm pregnant, I can eat anything I want", I've definitely been eating more carbs and sweets than I used to. I absolutely do not want a GD diagnosis, but sometimes I wonder if it'd be that extra kick to get me back on track.
Sorry if that went beyond the scope of your initial question...
You're right - sorry -- did not include all info.
What is missing from my post is that my friend had a history of blood sugar problems and a family history of diabetes, and her doctor strongly advised her that she shouldn't skip the test, and she did anyway -- precisely for the "over-medicating" reasons that somebody else stated. She said that she felt like the medical community "over-diagnosed" GD as a "catch-all" for problems during a pregnancy. She also was incredibly self conscious of her weight and felt like they were making assumptions about her based on her weight.
My friend -- who I absolutely adore -- has no medical degree or background or science background of any sort, and basically -- I THINK -- was just scared of her probably diagnosis and didn't want to deal with it.
We were very young. It was not a good decision.
FWIW, how are you suppose to know if you've developed it if you're showing no symptoms? I mean you said yourself that you had it in a prior pregnancy and not this one which goes to show every pregnancy is different. If you had 2 successful pregnancies without developing GD you could very likely still develop it in your 3rd....but how would we know if Dr.'s didn't test you for it based on individual/past experience?
Also, every office is different. For my 1hr test, I'm not required to fast and I get my results that day.
This is an interesting blog post about the subject.
https://thecontrarianmom.com/2010/07/09/glucose-test-refusing-the-gestational-diabetes-glucose-test/
Won't somebody think of the vaginas?
Your friend sounds uneducated or stupid. A catch all?
As someone who experienced 4th degree tears from an average sized baby I am terrified of tearing again. It required follow up procedures and the threat of reconstructive surgery. It took me well over 12 weeks to recouperate and it was very emotionally draining. 4th degree tears are more common with larger babies.
Which is why I was tested, based on my history. Mine was a case to test. I just agree there many more cases where it would not be indicated if patients were viewed as individuals and not a society.
I think GD can persist beyond pregnancy too. Someone I worked with many years ago developed GD and then remained diabetic. Given how hard diabetes can be on a person's body, that's not something to screw around with.
The test isn't going to hurt you and most people manage GD with dietary changes. If it's severe enough that you really need medication to manage it, I don't understand why you would refuse medication at the risk of causing serious damage to your body and to your baby. I don't see a downside to testing. Yes, there is a high false failure rate on the 1 hour test and yes, the 3 hour test is no fun. But wouldn't you rather be safe than face unnecessary complications from untreated GD?
This is what I'm trying to say. You can never know WHEN or IF you've developed it if you aren't tested for it. What I'm getting from your post is that you wish patients were viewed as individuals...so for example you think that if your first two pregnancies you never developed GD, you shouldn't have to be screened for it in your 3rd pregnancy? Correct me if I'm wrong. BUT, every pregnancy is different and you COULD develop it in that 3rd pregnancy and it will go unnoticed if every patient is viewed as an individual.
So we should just let people like the PP who said she was 22 years old, slender, and had no previous history fall through the cracks?
ALL of this. I had exactly ZERO risk factors and ZERO symptoms for GD when I was diagnosed with it while pregnant with DD. I don't believe there's any reason whatsoever to refuse the test and I can't roll my eyes enough at the PPs who said the test was "overmedicating" and that there was no risk with GD even if diagnosed.
I'm not trying to be snarky but if you know that it's possible to have GD and not show symptoms for it, why would you even consider refusing it? Quite frankly, if your insurance is the problem, I would rather deal with insurance issues over a simple blood test as opposed to, heaven forbid, medical bills for complications or issues related to having undiagnosed GD.