So that's one of the things that will risk you out of the birth center we go to. I didn't have GD last time, but my sister had it with one of her daughters (not sure if there is a family history connection with this or not, but wanted to add it just in case!)
I don't mind declining it and I'm hoping they "allow" me to decline and still see me as a patient. BUT my hesitation is, what if I *do* have GD? I am so not educated in this area and don't know what the real risks are.
Any opinions, advice?
Thank you for posting those! Definitely easy to understand, well laid out articles. I will bookmark them to pass on to friends who may be interested in the future.
So basically the big "risk" is a large baby? Uh, ok. Big babies don't scare me! I'm going to go back and read in my binder of information from the birth center b/c I'm pretty sure they've said (I remember from last time as well) that we can decline any of this. But I'm also pretty sure that having GD would risk me out, so I don't know if they *can* require the testing or not. I'll ask and find out at my appt tomorrow.
I know my birth center isnt allowed to decline it, but it also might depend on your risk factors too. I have to do the complete fasting test because I have PCOS which gives me a higher risk and the fact that I'm over weight also gives me a higher risk.
They also said i can go for a walk after taking the drink to 'burn off' some of the sugar.
Andrew - born 12/21/2010 5 weeks early!
I didn't do it. I think starving a pregnant mom for 12 hours and then pumping her full of sugar water just to see what happens is stupid and dangerous. Plus, too many ladies on my BB failed the 1 hr test only to have to waste 3 hours of their lives to pass the 3 hour one. Give me a HEALTHY breakfast and do a quick finger stick 2 hours later. Seriously. That is more accurate and gives you less chance of fainting or puking.
Dylan 4/22/04, Devon 6/24/06,Dorothy 9/13/07, Derek 12/19/09, Daniel 12/18/10, Daphne 2/24/12
Mindie and Mark, 5/16/09
I have declined with every pregnancy. My babies are large (3 of the 4 were more than 9lbs) but we have a family history of large babies without being diabetic. We also don't have a history of diabetes...I don't know how I would feel if I had a sister who had GD.
Babies of diabetic mothers are bigger, but they are bigger in a different shape than just a big baby. They are statistically most likely to have shoulder dystocia and other delivery complications because of how much bigger the shoulders tend to be.
I am actually declining it and I had GD with my 2nd pregnancy. I meet a number of the risk factors. I am 38 years old, my mother has severe type II diabetes and I ALL of my kids have been big. Samantha was 9lb 13oz at 40w2d, Lilly was 9lb 13oz at 38w2d and Isaiah was 7lb14oz at 36w1d (can you imagine if he had went to term, eeek). I actually passed the stupid test when I had GD, but my doctor knew I had it anyway and sent me for the food test. That test has you eat and then have your sugar tested 2 hours later. I think the tolerance test is incredibly flawed.
From what I know Emily is correct. The problem with "big baby" is where they are big. GD babies tend to be big through the shoulders and chest.
I would just make sure you research it throughly and then decide what is best for you. Good luck!
Christy birth doula, Hypnobabies instructor, small business owner & most importantly MOMMY.
There are some other risk factors for GD babies whose mothers aren't well controlled other than just being "big". They can have heart problems, respiratory problems and be hypoglycemic. There serious risks come about with uncontrolled GD and from what I've researched it has to be pretty bad. I had GD with the pregnancy I just got done with, but it wasn't too bad and was pretty easily controlled once I got the hang of that stupid diet.
The biggest problem I have with the GD test is that the test is becoming so stringent it is including women that are just barely close to the line and probably wouldn't have had any problems with their pregnancy had they not been included in the count. So, it's stupid to risk someone out of a birth center delivery just because you barely fall within the guidelines that they consider risky and it seems they consider so many more women risky now than ever before. My specialist actually said they are including a higher number of women in that group because of the stringency of the guidelines, but she said it was for safety because you never know (which is over-reactive and just plain ignorant if you ask me, but no one did).
I don't know if I'll skip the test next time (probably not) but I also won't be risking out of anything and therefore don't have anything to lose by knowing my numbers. I'll probably just take my sugars randomly in the beginning of the pg and then a little more often as I reach the magical 28th week. If I find them getting weird again I'll probably just go back on the diet.
Here's what I've found out since I had my baby about GD. I really thought it couldn't have that much to do with baby and had to be me (all me and my diet). However, my blood sugar numbers now compared to when I was pg are soooooooooooo different. When I was pg and I would eat a really good meal with lots of protein and few carbs I would get high numbers. Since the pregnancy I've had a few carb bender meals and my numbers are just fine (I've been doing random checks just out of curiosity). It almost doesn't seem to matter what I eat now, they're doing great. So, obviously it has to have something to do with the pregnancy.
fyi......I don't have a single person in my family that has ever had diabetes or GD. And, I only met 1 of the 4 risk factors and that was already having 1 baby over 9lbs.....that's it.
KUP on what you find out about refusing the test. I'm curious to see if they will let you. I wonder if it's set in stone though that you risk out. If you failed and were labeled with GD but you were one of those women who's numbers just barely put her in that category couldn't you argue your case that the test itself is subjective and the diagnosis has been overused.