Re: [ozmidwifery] Vaginal ultrasounds

[Marilyn Kleidon]

Hi Debby: It is my understanding that only u/s in the first trimester is accurate enough to give reliable dates with u/s (I only repeated that becauseI firmly believe that the woman is the most reliable source however sometimes the mum doesn't know: irregular menses or lactation ammenohrea (sp) and (amazingly) frequent intercourse and so, if dates are going to be an issue (postdate protocols) then a first trimester u/s may be justified. I think the 20 week u/s may be the one that is deleted because if the mum is interested in nuchal fold thickness then (I think) the optimal time is either 11 weeks or 14 weeks (I can't remember which one, but there is an article in the BIRTH journal on this 2000 or 2001) definetly not 20 weeks. So, if this nuchal fold thickness measurement is important for clients regarding continuation of the pregnancy, then I guess a first trimester vaginal u/s is required. I shuddered when I saw my first vaginal probe. I guess there is no way to make them differently (they just are very phallic) which is why great sensitivity must be employed by caregivers using them. The 20 weeks u/s has been used for scanning fetal anatomy for anomalies but is not reliable for dating. I peronally don't advise any of this without a medical concern, but, women need to be aware of all available services and so we do discuss these options too. marilyn ----- Original Message ----- From: Debby M To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, September 07, 2002 11:28 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Vaginal ultrasounds Hmmm - ultrasounds to confirm womens dates this early on - I thought that the 20wk ultrasound was supposed to do this.  Surely 20wks notice is sufficient of an impending birth if the OB wants an accurate date?  And this way the woman would only "have to have" one ultrasound in her pregnancy - maybe a pertinent argument as there seems to be some (questionable) link between autism and frequent ultrasounds.  I wonder if they would change their minds if this link was proven or if someone just tried to sue on the suspected risk anyway.  After all they are all scared of being sued for cerebal palsy caused by birth injury even though the evidence these days is that this condition is more likely a defect in formation than a problem caused by birth.   Debby     Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: Click Here -- This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics. Visit to subscribe or unsubscribe.