# First Trimester Doppler Question



## SarahBear

Hello,

So I've read stuff about ultrasounds that makes them sound a bit sketchy. I plan to not do an ultrasound unless there is a particular indication to do so. With the doppler, however, my midwife seems to default to doing it. She was talking about my next appointment and how we'll use the doppler then. I'm not so sure I want to use it though. I like the idea of waiting until I can actually hear the heartbeat with a fetoscope (fancy stethoscope) rather than though ultrasound technology. I also question the idea that it's completely harmless. In an apparently healthy pregnancy, is the doppler really necessary? What information can it provide that a fetolcope several months later can't provide? What are your thoughts? Do you think I should tell my midwife I'd rather wait?

P.S. I know this might be more accurately categorized in the first trimester forum, but I posted it here so I could get the perspective of those using midwives instead of doctors.


----------



## lozzy21

If you don't plan on having an ultrasound how do you know your having a healthy pregnancy? 

It proves that your baby has a heartbeat, missed misscariges (where the baby dies but your body does not expell the baby) are unfortunately common and are only picked up through an ultrasound.


----------



## Joyzerelly

lozzy21 said:


> If you don't plan on having an ultrasound how do you know your having a healthy pregnancy?
> 
> It proves that your baby has a heartbeat, missed misscariges (where the baby dies but your body does not expell the baby) are unfortunately common and are only picked up through an ultrasound.

If your baby had died then an ultrasound couldn't fix that. Your body would soon tell you that something was up and go through the natural processes to expel the foetus.

Ultrasound technology is still relatively new, we don't truly know the risks and women since the beginning of time have carried many a healthy pregnancy without ultrasounds. I think the use of dopplers is unnecessary albeit reassuring at times.
We have had scans (two) this time as I'm thinking of having an unassisted birth and I wanted to be sure that my baby was normal/healthy before doing so. We have kept our scans to a minimum though and haven't had any extras. 

The midwife used the doppler at one of my appointments recently and since my baby was obviously desperate to get away from it, she and I decided that we should respect that its not 'her' bag! I now don't ever have the doppler used as I can feel my baby moving and therefore I know that she's alive. 
Many women go through pregnancy completely unassisted, my mother didn't even go to the doctor with her 2nd baby. She certainly didn't have any scans as they weren't available.


----------



## lozzy21

No it won't change it but it will let you know. There has been cases where the body has not expelled the baby and it became septic making the mother ill


----------



## StillFertile

Although I won't forgo scans completely, I too am in the skeptical camp when it comes to the safety or repeated exposure to ultrasound/doppler. I think the jury is still out and when I see girls on the other boards talking about buying home dopplers and using them everyday, I cringe. 

I think many midwives use them because they are tools, but I don't think you are wrong to wait for a fetoscope if that's what you'd prefer. It's your pregnancy!


----------



## tinytabby

I had a couple of scans in the first trimester because of heavy bleeding and I wanted to know baby was still there! They were very reassuring. I'm getting an anomaly scan at 20 weeks as well. I want to know everything is OK with baby. I haven't read anything on ultrasound which I think is sketchy.

I have to say I like the idea of dopplers less - once you can feel your baby moving then you can tell they're alive as another poster said. People with the home dopplers seem to use them a lot and I don't know if that's a good thing.

I respect anyone who chooses not to do all the tests. I couldn't, but that's because I'm a total worrywart. Hopefully pregnancy and birth will help me be less of one.


----------



## Elucida

Well, the evidence is pretty hit and miss but I, personally, would never accept the use of a doppler. I've accepted both scans, though for various reasons, and baby absolutely hates them - they are apparently very, very uncomfortable for babies (the sound they transmit through the amniotic fluid) and dopplers are 10 times worse.

I also cringe at the thought of people using them every day, though I understand that many women are anxious. I just wish that more time and effort went into helping women to feel confident and less anxious about pregnancy but, of course, there's no money in that.

As for needing scans, at all. I don't think they are necessary at all if you don't wish to know about the health of your child. Many countries and even districts in the UK do not offer a 12 week scan - it isn't to check for MMC, it's simply a dating scan, or a NT scan for some. The risk of septicaemia from a failed pregnancy is incredibly low and easily detectible - your body will, almost always, let you know that something is wrong in the form of bleeding, discharge, a temp, a rash... all kinds. An MMC being fatal for a mother is pretty much unheard of, scan or no scan.

I think ultrasound technology certainly has its place but with no "untoward" symptoms, they aren't necessary at all.


----------



## Cordelia Lynn

Using the doppler for 30 seconds is the same as getting a 30 minute ultrasound. Not ever proven safe - many believe these types of ultrasound can cause brain damage because they are proven to increase fetal tissue temperature. I refused the doppler - it is totally unnecessary! My midwives were completely understanding/agreeable. If a provider forces you to use technology that you're not comfortable with, I would encourage you to find a different provider. Good luck Sarah!


----------

