# Did anyone refuse the gestational diabetes test?



## marieb

I'm considering refusing the gestational diabetes test this time around. I'm a healthy 22 year old with no family history of diabetes. I had an uncomplicated first pregnancy and my son was born healthy and at a normal weight (7lbs 14oz). 
Having 0 risk factors for gestational diabetes really makes me question just how necessary it is that I go through the screening again. I hate needles so if a test isn't totally necessary I'd rather just pass on it.

I have a midwife appointment at the end of October and will definitely be discussing in then. However, until then does anyone else have any good resources about the gestation diabetes test or did any of you actually refuse it?


----------



## gryphongrl

Hi, I'm not doing the glucose tolerance test either. I have some literature on it from my midwife, and it's got lots of ways to manage your blood sugar (small meals, don't gain too much, avoid refined sugars, exercise regularly, etc). Also the literature points out that the glucose tolerance test (GTT) tells you whether statistically your sugar levels fall on the high end of the scale but it doesn't do a really good job of identifying which babies will have the problems associated with GD. And once you are labeled "At risk" your pregnancy will be managed much differently. Hope that helps. My midwife is not into the GTT at all so I didn't get any pushback.


----------



## booflebump

I refused the random blood glucose screening which then leads to gtt if you fail. The neighbouring trust doesn't offer any gtt screening at all, so when questioned as to why I was refusing, one of my 'cheeky' reasons was that I didn't see what difference 50 miles made! It's a seriously flawed test, and I was happy with the research I had done in to it. Considering some trusts don't offer at all, and some only to high risk women, it doesn't seem there is any agreement to its importance between professionals either

xxx


----------



## MissCherry15

I refused it this time round :) xx


----------



## MindUtopia

I plan to refuse it as well. If there are any issues, they'll be obvious, but no sense taking a test just to have some high risk sign hanging over your head if you are perfectly healthy.


----------



## aliss

I didn't, but I had a large baby w/dystocia last time so I just wanted to be sure of that.

If you are interested in declining, Ina May's Guide to Childbirth has a lot of detailed information about how she manages diet in pregnancy and about this particular test (which is generally NOT done on her clients). Women are not turned away from home/natural birth or induced due to GD at her practice.


----------



## jamhs

I refused. For some reason the first midwife I saw thought I should have it, but spoke to the regular midwife and said I couldn't see the reason the other one thought I should have it done. Have had two previous healthy babies, my BMI is 22, and have no close fh of it. She agreed that it was unnecessary for me to have-phew!!


----------



## 17thy

Hey i didnt take the GTT or any other test for that matter with my sons pregnancy :)


----------



## NaturalMomma

I do not do the GD test. I didn't with ds2 and won't with this one. My MW is able to check for warning signs in other non-invasive ways.


----------



## marieb

Thanks everyone! Definitely feeling more comfortable with refusing it now.
I know my midwives will be okay with whatever I choose but it's good to know that the test isn't really all that necessary in my case.


----------



## A_K_and_K

I wish I had refused it!

I failed the 1 hour test and then went in for the 2 hour test, but was horribly sick for both tests (which can significantly alter glucose levels) and "failed" one out of three blood draws by .1.

Doctor said I was "glucose intolerant" and referred me to a Diabetes Clinic, which I begrudgingly went to and was told by their "Diabetes Doctor" that he wasn't much concerned, but now it's marked on my chart and they have to "take care" to watch baby after she's born so she doesn't start "seizing and die" (doctor's scare tactic).

They wanted me to go to the Clinic this past Friday for more fasting/blood draws/etc but I truly feel they made a wrong diagnosis, as the Diabetes expert indicated it was just policy to bring me in as I was .1 over (he said "is 61 mph speeding in a 60 zone?"). I didn't go but will probably go this Friday just so they don't start after me and use more scare tactics. 

Just frustrated that I got tagged glucose intolerant, but I don't have to check my blood by myself or anything like that. And frustrated my own doctor used scare tactics on me. Seeing as how I'm going for a completely natural birth and am declining TONS of newborn procedures, I think I should ready up for the full front of scare tactics, though.....


----------



## gryphongrl

A_K_and_K said:


> I wish I had refused it!
> 
> I failed the 1 hour test and then went in for the 2 hour test, but was horribly sick for both tests (which can significantly alter glucose levels) and "failed" one out of three blood draws by .1.

Oh geez that's terrible... I'm really sorry to hear that happened. Will they let you do it again and re-write the data? I'm glad it's not worrying you (the "diagnosis")... it shouldn't.


----------



## ILoveYouZandT

I did it in my first pregnancy, and passed. 

Didn't go my second pregnancy because I was simply too busy with school, work and raising my son. My son's were both of healthy weights and general great health, as was I.

This time around I'm not going to do it. I have already told my midwife I will likely skip and she's not too concerned. And I DO have a family history of diabetes. Both of my parents have it. Other family members have as well. I have had my sugars tested usually once a year as it just so happens to go (pregnant, ttc not going well, pregnant again haha). And I've always had great levels, I'm usually a 5. I'm really not too concerned. If I happen to notice something then I'll rethink it.


----------



## PepsiChic

I didnt refuse it but I thought about it, I cant have procedures with needles and that was my may concern. We ended up doing a finger prick test, which is what they use when checking blood sugar in diabetics...I dont know why they cant just do that for all pregnant woman!

but if needles are an issue you can always request a finger prick test.


----------



## A_K_and_K

gryphongrl said:


> A_K_and_K said:
> 
> 
> I wish I had refused it!
> 
> I failed the 1 hour test and then went in for the 2 hour test, but was horribly sick for both tests (which can significantly alter glucose levels) and "failed" one out of three blood draws by .1.
> 
> Oh geez that's terrible... I'm really sorry to hear that happened. Will they let you do it again and re-write the data? I'm glad it's not worrying you (the "diagnosis")... it shouldn't.Click to expand...

Well, I'm nearly 37 weeks now and while I had thought about redoing the test, at this point I don't think it really even matters anymore! 

I was also doing a lot of reading about how useless Glucose tests are during pregnancy, and it's all just another way for doctors to push interventions on you (early C-sections, scare tactics about big babies, hypoglycemic babies, etc), so I'm at this point even debating going back in to the Diabetes clinic (it's a 45 min drive, nearly $5 in parking costs, and it's at 7:30 a.m., would have to get more blood drawn and they have butchered my veins over the last several months....) my belly is measuring fine, and our baby has always been a bit small, so... it just seems so pointless to me.


----------



## gryphongrl

A_K_and_K, I actually have a reference that says diagnosing women as having GD hasn't been effective at figuring out which babies are actually going to need the interventions... it's a measure of how well the mom handles glucose and it's loosely correlated with baby, not absolutely correlated... The things the docs say to women to scare them into doing what they want are unconscionable. Laugh in their face when they say, "You might have a HUGE BABY!!! OH NO!!"


----------



## Irish Eyes

Yep, I refused. First they wanted me to have it due to family history, but it's only my nan who got it in old age. Then there was protein in my urine - again i refused. The following week I was back to normal and she said it probably was down to the lucozade I'd just had which is what I'd thought. 

In the UK it's only offered if you're at risk I believe, so you wouldn't even be offered it here with your history


----------



## Cjackord

I'm in a different boat than most here... I seriously thought about refusing (and my midwife was totally ok with it), but I ended up deciding that I personally wanted the information. If you have gestational diabetes, that's something you don't really want to mess around with. It IS diabetes. Even if you ignore the possibility of hypoglycemia or macrosomnia in your baby, YOU are still having trouble with sugars in your blood. It might be a pain to fingerprick throughout the day, but ignoring a possible problem doesn't make it any less real. 

The test has flaws (clearly). But your blood glucose is not going to be elevated unless your body is struggling to keep up with insulin production. 

Just thought I'd offer a different opinion!


----------



## amjon

They do the GTT for ALL women here. It can be deadly to both baby and mom if left untreated. Women with NO risk factors (and even healthy previous pregnancies) can and do get GD.


----------



## gryphongrl

They don't do the GTT for all women in the US... I was actually counseled by my midwife that it may unnecessarily subject me to interventions.


----------



## marieb

Thank you all for the info and opinions :)

I did some reading and found that SOGC (I'm in Canada) has found no evidence for routine screening among women with no risk factors. I also thought it was really interesting how Canada/USA do routine screening while the UK only screens women with risk factors. Seems obstetrics is full of conflicting information!

My midwife appointment is in 2.5 weeks and I'm very interested about what they have to say.


----------



## jamhs

My opinion on why USA/Canada do more tests etc is because they have a payment system with insurance companies. The more they do, the more money they get. Same with booking in inductions and giving epidurals. I'm American, but my dh is English and we live in the UK, and my family think completely different than I do about the birthing process. They don't get home births or anything like refusing unnecessary screening.


----------



## aliss

Our system in Canada is socialist like in the UK, not the US.


----------



## amjon

gryphongrl said:


> They don't do the GTT for all women in the US... I was actually counseled by my midwife that it may unnecessarily subject me to interventions.

They do in Florida.


----------



## amjon

jamhs said:


> My opinion on why USA/Canada do more tests etc is because they have a payment system with insurance companies. The more they do, the more money they get. Same with booking in inductions and giving epidurals. I'm American, but my dh is English and we live in the UK, and my family think completely different than I do about the birthing process. They don't get home births or anything like refusing unnecessary screening.

I honestly don't think they do ENOUGH screening. I think they should check thyroid levels on everyone and check for common blood clotting disorders (and I bet ANY mother of a stillborn would feel the same). If I had know some things I could have possibly saved one or all three of my babies before they died. If you don't have the screening that is offered (and recommended and FREE), then you really have no one to blame but yourself if your child dies.


----------



## gryphongrl

amjon said:


> If you don't have the screening that is offered (and recommended and FREE), then you really have no one to blame but yourself if your child dies.

Amjon, I definitely see where you're coming from, and can't even imagine the pain of having a stillbirth. From my viewpoint, this is the home and natural birthing forum. I am not at all the person who tells anyone where and where not to give their opinions, but your views are consistently pro-medicine and pro-testing and it just puzzles me... I am confused why you continuously come on this forum in particular and knock us for our beliefs. This post really goes over the top. The reason some of us refuse tests is because we believe just as strongly as you do that what we're doing is what is best for OUR babies. Imagine if I said, "if your child dies because you <circumcised, formula fed, have an elective c-section, got a flu vaccine, whatever> you have no one else to blame but yourself"?! That would be completely, totally out of line and not at all respectful of other people's beliefs, and I think what you said is also completely and totally out of line.

If you mean that you blame yourself for the loss of your child, please don't, you don't know what the outcome would have been if you had changed anything, and you are not responsible.


----------



## amjon

gryphongrl said:


> amjon said:
> 
> 
> If you don't have the screening that is offered (and recommended and FREE), then you really have no one to blame but yourself if your child dies.
> 
> Amjon, I definitely see where you're coming from, and can't even imagine the pain of having a stillbirth. From my viewpoint, this is the home and natural birthing forum. I am not at all the person who tells anyone where and where not to give their opinions, but your views are consistently pro-medicine and pro-testing and it just puzzles me... I am confused why you continuously come on this forum in particular and knock us for our beliefs. This post really goes over the top. The reason some of us refuse tests is because we believe just as strongly as you do that what we're doing is what is best for OUR babies. Imagine if I said, "if your child dies because you <circumcised, formula fed, have an elective c-section, got a flu vaccine, whatever> you have no one else to blame but yourself"?! That would be completely, totally out of line and not at all respectful of other people's beliefs, and I think what you said is also completely and totally out of line.
> 
> If you mean that you blame yourself for the loss of your child, please don't, you don't know what the outcome would have been if you had changed anything, and you are not responsible.Click to expand...

There is a HUGE difference between a simple blood screening and a medical intervention that may be unneeded. I wanted (and still do) as natural a birth as possible. I planned a birth center birth, but ended up having to be induced to deliver a stillborn. I was offered an epidural numerous times and continued to turn it down time and time again during my labor. Screening is done ONLY for the good of the mother/ child and really is virtually risk free, so I don't really understand the purpose of refusing something that only gives you more information. A c-section or epidural DOES carry risks and should be weighed (and I would refuse both unless in an emergency situation), but a screening blood test does not. Medicine can be a great help to us now. To refuse something that will not harm you in any way (other than a quick prick to collect the blood) and could save the life of both you and your child is something I consider silly. At one point I was told my losses may have been caused by blood sugar issues, so it can be a real problem in pregnancy and is the reason it is given to everyone here. It doesn't mean that I'm not pro-natural birth (or at least as natural that can be done safely).


----------



## Reidfidleir

I did. I also did not have any risk factors. Tried to eat a balanced diet anyway


----------



## Jezzielin

I'm finding myself very irritated today. I did not refuse the test but then failed my 1 hour glucose test. Then I had to take my 3 hour yesterday and they are refusing to give me my results, as they will only give to to my doctor. Kinda bull because yesterday they tried looking it up for me and they said the results weren't up yet. Now today the lady said she won't look for me. 

I don't think I would have refused, if it truly uncntrolled, it can be an issue for baby and it will turn the excess glucose to fat, thus bigger baby and more risk of not having a natural birth but feeling a bit slighted they won't give me my results when I know they are right there. Just be nice to know and not wait now a total of three weeks on all these tests before they say, "oh yea, we need to make some changes". Great thanks for letting me in on it now. Sorry rant.


----------



## Hangin_On_AGS

I'm refusing, I have issues keeping my blood sugar high enough, because of this and other factors I eat a very balanced diet, small non carb loading portions frequently I stay away from any fast fix sugars... Basically I'm already eating a diet for someone who has diabetes because it helps keep my sugars up and stable which I need to try and reduce the amount of seizures I have. 

Because I already have dealt with blood sugar feelings matched with a number on a monitor I can tell you what my blood sugar is around pretty darn accurately based on how i'm feeling. and If I feel that my blood sugar is constantly higher than my normal I will go and have the glucose test for the safety of my baby

I also have no other risk factors 

Can I ask maybe a stupid question? There was a comment that these test have virtually no items to weigh.. However is there really concrete evidence out there that having us drink that sugar mix is 100% safe? it's a variable that cannot be controlled. I can understand if it was just a blood draw but they are adding another variable that I'm not sure i'm comfortable with


----------



## rachiedata

I will definitely refuse next time - only had one last time because my BMI was slightly high (I was wearing Doc Martens for my booking appointment) and my father has type 2 diabetes from being middle aged and into the good life, nothing particularly hereditary, yet I was still "at risk". The three hour test last time was a drag, and that was even with the bonus time off work, escaping the hospital after I'd been "advised" to stay in the waiting room... can't image what a bugger it would be this time.

Entirely correct that you can develop GD with or without risk factors. If you're worried, get the test, if you've no problems or concerns or symptoms...?


----------

