|
Taima posted:I don't know if wanting kids came from being with my husband or just by the natural course of things. I have been with my husband for nearly seven years but before I met him I never wanted to get married or have children. After we got together we talked about kids in an abstract way and in those discussions I realized I wanted kids, but in the future. For me the desire to have children is mainly because I just love children. I love how they think and behave (or misbehave) and how they develop from little munchkins into adults and I want to create this life with my husband to nurture and watch flourish. So that is the more theoretical side, so to speak, of why I want children. But when I got to about 18 I realized it was more than that, and since then every year I've wanted children more and more and I think that is more based in hormones. I see a baby and just ache because I want my own. I am someone who loves to travel, learn, explore, etc. but I think you can love those things, do those things, and still have children. Maybe it's about learning to incorporate children into your life instead of thinking of them as some end to your life as you know it. Looking at children as an end to life as you know it is accurate in some ways. You can never go back to being childless once you're a parent. But on the other hand, what are you giving up? For me, I don't feel like I'll be giving anything up, but instead gaining. Of course, I'm not a parent yet so this is speculation but it's how I feel about having children. Children force you to be more responsible (hopefully) and if you're not ready for that kind of responsibility, or simply don't want that sort of responsibility yet, that's better than rushing into having kids and resenting them. This will sound cliche, but I think it's true. All people are different. I am 22 and feel ready to have children. My husband is substantially older than I am, and has no children, has never been married, etc. and I don't think when he was my age he was anywhere close to being ready for children. I think, had he been married or in a long-term relationship like we are in, he would have still felt like he needed a lot more time before he had children because he wanted to do so much more before settling down. At this point, that attitude isn't exactly gone, but he thinks about children differently; not as an end but a beginning. I don't know about most women but for me, if my husband didn't want children I would be fine with that. I love children, I very much want my own children, so much so it can hurt to see a baby because I want one so much, but I am fine living my life with my husband. Would I be sad, disappointed and need some time to think things over? Absolutely. Would it be a deal breaker for my marriage? Absolutely not. But that's just me. I would advise you to ask your girlfriend how she feels about children/lack of children if it is a worry of yours. So, after this wall of text I suppose I'm saying that all women think about children differently, you can want them in a hormonal biological clock ticking way and at the same time be logical and practical about it. It isn't an either/or kind of situation. I hope I answered your questions fully and to the best of my ability.
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2009 19:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 06:34 |
|
|
dishonesty posted:And because I've been on the pill so long, I have no idea how long my cycle is so I just have to wait and see when I get my next period and hope that it's regular from then on and I regularly ovulate. This is my first month off the pill and I should be getting my period NOWish. According to a standard 28 day cycle I should have started it 2 days ago, so it's now day 30. I did a test the other day, just because I saw it lying there and wanted to haha.. but it was negative. I doubt I'm pregnant already, but I was really hoping to have a somewhat "normal" cycle. Bah, no wonder people take so long to conceive, it's stressful even from day 1! lol
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2009 04:31
|
|
|
Even if your cycle isn't normal now, it might get there. It can take up to a year for cycles to get back to normal after going off the Pill, sometimes even longer. Of course, if you're tracking ovulation and you get pregnant, you'll have to wait 'til after the baby to see if you're regular. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2009 04:33
|
|
|
Fire In The Disco posted:Even if your cycle isn't normal now, it might get there. It can take up to a year for cycles to get back to normal after going off the Pill, sometimes even longer. Of course, if you're tracking ovulation and you get pregnant, you'll have to wait 'til after the baby to see if you're regular. Yeah I know. Was just kinda hoping I'd be all normal and it'd be easy, you know? lol I'll have to learn how to do the cervical mucous stuff, seems like the best way from what a lot of you girls have said.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2009 04:41
|
|
|
I'll let you in on my secret (keep in mind this doesn't work as perfectly for everyone as it did for me)-- I never tested my mucous. I just used ovu strips every day, and when I detected a tiny LH surge, I tested twice a day. First go around, we got pregnant. So I'm one of the ones who ovu strips work well for; there's a small percentage of women for whom they don't work at all-- they either always test positive for an LH surge or they never show one at all. But for me, it worked perfectly! 
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2009 04:45
|
|
|
dishonesty posted:This is my first month off the pill and I should be getting my period NOWish. According to a standard 28 day cycle I should have started it 2 days ago, so it's now day 30. A lot of women don't have 28 day cycles. Mine are usually between 35 - 40. Fire In The Disco posted:I'll let you in on my secret (keep in mind this doesn't work as perfectly for everyone as it did for me)-- I never tested my mucous. I just used ovu strips every day, and when I detected a tiny LH surge, I tested twice a day. First go around, we got pregnant. So I'm one of the ones who ovu strips work well for; there's a small percentage of women for whom they don't work at all-- they either always test positive for an LH surge or they never show one at all. But for me, it worked perfectly! The plus side to mucous is its free. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2009 04:50
|
|
|
True, but this was so easy for me I'd be willing to shell out the few bucks for the test strips from early-pregnancy-tests.com next time too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2009 04:56
|
|
|
Okay so I'm stupid and impatient and did a test anyway. I stupidly didn't use my first morning's wee, so it's not as concentrated or whatever. The FAINTEST of faint lines showed up... so faint that I'm not sure it's actually a result line, and maybe that it's more just where the line should be. What do you guys think? Edit: I realise I'm being totally crazy about this and it's only month 1 lol. I guess I'll have to wait til tomorrow and use first morning's pee.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2009 05:51
|
|
|
dishonesty posted:Okay so I'm stupid and impatient and did a test anyway. I stupidly didn't use my first morning's wee, so it's not as concentrated or whatever. If that showed up in 10 minutes or less, it is a definite positive. Congrats! Those tests are really sensitive, I always recommend them. My first positive looked just like that. I'll be 30 weeks on Monday. This is at 10 dpo.  ETA: The morning after I took the above test, I took a digital test and I had enough HCG in my system to show "pregnant". You may as well splurge on the digital. Lannie fucked around with this message at 12:37 on Dec 4, 2009 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2009 06:04
|
|
|
I'd give it a few days and test again, it should be a bit darker in a few days if you are pregnant, which you might very well be.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2009 12:11
|
|
|
I got my period yesterday. This indicates I'm not pregnant (also took a test to be extra sure) and my luteal phase is too short. Way to short. It was 7 days. Does anyone have any experience with having a short luteal phase? I read up on it and it doesn't seem to be a big issue for most people since there are a lot of treatments for it, but I'm still bummed. I was so hoping that since I'm healthy and my husband's healthy that we wouldn't have too much trouble trying to conceive. I'm relieved I'm charting though, since otherwise I would have no idea there was a problem. I'm just frustrated. I'm going to call my ob/gyn today to figure out what to do next, but if anyone has any personal experience with this I'd love to hear what you have to say. Everything I've read makes it seem that a short luteal phase is very treatable and so not a big obstacle in trying to conceive. Is this accurate?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2009 15:48
|
|
|
Okay so I suck at waiting. I went and bought a digital test, barely had enough pee to dribble on it lol but it came up 'Pregnant' !!! I'm still hesitant. The digital test was a 2pack so ill do another tomorrow morning. Really really hoping its positive too... Ill go to the doctor to confirm and find out what to do from here. I was never never expecting it to happen this soon, so I'm freaking our a little... In a good way though!!! Kinda feel bad falling so quickly and without charting or anything when so many of you have struggled for ages.. Years even. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2009 16:25
|
|
|
There's basically no such thing as a false positive, only false negatives, so congrats, Mama! Don't feel badly, them's the breaks. Mine was also really quick to happen-- sometimes the stars are aligned, or however you want to describe it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2009 16:33
|
|
|
Grayscale Rainbow posted:I got my period yesterday. This indicates I'm not pregnant (also took a test to be extra sure) and my luteal phase is too short. Way to short. It was 7 days. Does anyone have any experience with having a short luteal phase? I read up on it and it doesn't seem to be a big issue for most people since there are a lot of treatments for it, but I'm still bummed. I was so hoping that since I'm healthy and my husband's healthy that we wouldn't have too much trouble trying to conceive. I'm relieved I'm charting though, since otherwise I would have no idea there was a problem. I'm just frustrated. Well both me and my husband are healthy and as of the end of this month we've been trying for a year.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2009 16:47
|
|
|
I've been at it since February and I'll I've got to show for it is 2 miscarriages.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2009 19:42
|
|
|
Grayscale Rainbow posted:I got my period yesterday. This indicates I'm not pregnant (also took a test to be extra sure) and my luteal phase is too short. Way to short. It was 7 days. Does anyone have any experience with having a short luteal phase? I read up on it and it doesn't seem to be a big issue for most people since there are a lot of treatments for it, but I'm still bummed. I was so hoping that since I'm healthy and my husband's healthy that we wouldn't have too much trouble trying to conceive. I'm relieved I'm charting though, since otherwise I would have no idea there was a problem. I'm just frustrated. I don't have a luteal phase defect but I did have fertility issues so I was on fertility support boards, and a lot of women had luteal phase defects. It's one of the easier fertility issues to fix, IIRC it's treated with oral progesterone. Congrats dishonesty, you are pregnant! Like Fire said, HPT's give false negatives but not false positives.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2009 20:40
|
|
|
Grayscale Rainbow posted:I got my period yesterday. This indicates I'm not pregnant (also took a test to be extra sure) and my luteal phase is too short. Way to short. It was 7 days. Does anyone have any experience with having a short luteal phase? I read up on it and it doesn't seem to be a big issue for most people since there are a lot of treatments for it, but I'm still bummed. I was so hoping that since I'm healthy and my husband's healthy that we wouldn't have too much trouble trying to conceive. I'm relieved I'm charting though, since otherwise I would have no idea there was a problem. I'm just frustrated. It's definitely easily treatable these days. There are several things you can do. The "at home remedy" would be to start taking a B comlex vitamin and to start either taking vitex pills or a prenatal with vitex in it. It's not guaranteed, but both usually help regulate menstrual cycles. Doctor wise, as Asulita said, your OB or midwife can put you on progesterone. My sil had this issue after her first was born. After 2 or so month on meds she got pregnant with her 2nd.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2009 21:11
|
|
|
Thanks to the people who responded to me earlier. I forgot to say that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2009 02:14
|
|
|
So, it looks like I might be joining the baby train in a few months. After years of telling friends and family that the last thing I should do is "spawn a crotchling," I'm actually ready, willing, and desire to have a baby.Me saying negative things about having kids was an outward expression of my insecurities and lack of preparedness for them. Up until I met my husband three years ago I had never been in a stable relationship that even gave me an inkling that it would be okay to have a baby. Not only that, but I was definitely too young. And no, it isn't because everyone else is doing it. December 6th of this month seemed like a normal day. I had lunch with a very good friend, and then came home to spend time with my husband. I started to have sharp, stabbing pains right where my uterus should be, and the pain only got worse. I ended up not really being able to speak because I was sobbing so much and the pain too much. My husband took me to the ER where I was seen before a car crash victim. I was given IV dilaudid and it knocked my rear end out (it was great). Since I had an IUD and all my symptoms pointed to ectopic pregnancy, both a vaginal and abdominal ultrasound was performed. The great news was that I didn't have an ectopic pregnancy. The bad news was that my IUD had somehow slipped so it was positioned in such a manner as to cause all that (loving awful) pain. Since it was positioned funny, they weren't going to take it out there so I had to call my gyno right as the office opened on the 7th to make an appointment. When I told the receptionist that I had been in the ER because of a malpositioned IUD, she put me on hold then came back and asked if I could be there in 30 minutes. Removal was easy; I felt only a small cramp. The gynecologist mentioned that the IUD was "very bloody" but I should be fine. Since I was still reeling over the prior night's events, I didn't think to ask what she was talking about. I was just relieved that all my pain magically went away! If anyone can give me some insight into what she meant (was it embedded?) I would appreciate that. She said everything should be fine, but do things like what happened to me affect fertility? The baby part: My husband and I had sex on the 5th (without anything other than the IUD as BC) and I'm not due for my period. In fact, right about the time the IUD shifted, I was feeling that ovulating feeling. I suppose now I wait and see. If I don't get pregnant this cycle, we're going to probably wait until February to start trying. The IUD fiasco has been kind of a wake-up call. In the mean time, I'm going to keep up with this thread since it has such great information. I'm looking forward to hopping aboard the baby train. tl;dr: I had to have my IUD removed because it was causing me horrible, horrible pain. Now I'm worried about possible repercussions from it. I'm possibly going to be knocked up this month. If I'm not, I'm going to wait until February (probably).
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2009 16:25
|
|
|
I went to my ob/gyn today and he said that everything is fine. He doesn't think my luteal phase is too short. He looked at my charts and told me all is well. I don't understand how my luteal phase is fine if it's under 10 days, but that's what he said so I've got to trust him on it. Hopefully he's right.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2009 00:54
|
|
|
Well, the time has come! Two separate tests tell me that yes, I am up the duff. Woooohooooooo! It feels like I've been waiting forever. Except now I am very, very paranoid that something will go wrong.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2009 19:39
|
|
|
Congrats, Miss Shell! Don't worry, we all get that feeling at first. I think I took 5-6 tests in the first two weeks after finding out (I was 5 weeks along when I found out), juuuuuuust to make sure I really was still pregnant.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2009 19:43
|
|
|
Okay. Done reading the thread, guess I will ask you guys' opinions now. Wall of text, my apologies. My husband and I have been married for about two years. We're both pretty young- 23 and 25. He just left the active duty military and is now just in the National Guard. He had a good job up until very recently, when they downsized due to the economy and laid him off. He is currently doing carpentry/remodeling/general handyman work until he leaves in a couple months for 6 months of paid military training. I am still slowly making my way through my last year and a half of college. For these reasons, I would not be interested in makin' any babies for at least a year, until he is done with his training and certified for a better job with the military. And hopefully then I will either be done with school, or much closer to being done. That would all be fine and well, except for the stupid autoimmune disease I got diagnosed with about a month before we got married. I have rheumatoid arthritis. Inflammatory, incurable, horribly painful, degenerative joint disease. They don't know what to do about it, and they don't know for sure that it's genetic or caused by environmental factors, an infection.. maybe a combination of all 3? No one seems to know. Hell, half the drugs they use to treat it are things that are used in treating other diseases and they accidentally realized it was helping RA patients. Chemotherapy drugs, anti-malarials-- weird stuff. My rheumatologist and gynecologist both tell me they don't THINK my RA would have any effect on a pregnancy, and that they don't THINK my children would have RA, as well. Apparently no one can give me any better answer than that. I have no family history of it and I ended up with it, but it still concerns me that I might pass it on. I have been avoiding all the heavy-duty treatments like chemotherapy because of the damage they might potentially due to my reproductive organs. I want to keep having kids as an option. So I guess my question is-- If you thought might possibly pass something bad on to your children, would you just forego having them altogether? The doctors seem to think the odds are in my favor, but I don't know if I would ever forgive myself if I had to watch my child go through the pain I go through on a daily basis. This is also the reason I think that if we decide to have children, we shouldn't wait until I'm 28 or 30 or something. I think my current treatment is working pretty well, and I may be at a standstill in disease activity, but I don't want to wait too long and end up with kids I can't pick up or chase around and play with. I am hopeful I will not get that bad, but I don't want to my kids to be the ones that can't have sleepovers or what-have-you because their mom is a bedridden sadsack. I just don't know.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2009 22:18
|
|
|
sinistrality posted:I just don't know. Take this worth a grain of salt if you will, and this is just the opinion of someone who has never had any experience with someone with RA or how bad it can get. I guess I would ask myself if the disease is so bad that you wouldn't want to exist? I know that's kind of an existential thing now, considering you don't have kids and you actually exist now. Also, do the treatments make you feel well enough that you can function? You mentioned that you were worried about not being able to be there for your kids the way you want to be, and it would probably be hard, but I'd imagine they'll love you because you're their mother, not because you can go play jump rope with them all the time. This might seem insensitive, and I'm sorry if it does, but the disease isn't fatal. And beyond that, it's something they're not even sure is truly genetic. You might not pass it on at all. My own experience is nothing as serious, but I was born with glaucoma, and so was my father, and it randomly popped up in us and nobody else in my entire family. My daughter doesn't have it at 16 months, and I'm hoping the kid I'm pregnant with now won't. I'm just bringing up ideas really, I have no idea what I would do in your situation. It's really I guess just something you and your husband have to sit down and talk about, and weigh the pros and cons of each scenario. Good luck with everything, I hope you're able to find some relief from your RA.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2009 05:54
|
|
|
Speaking as the mother of a baby with a genetic disease (cystic fibrosis), I've been in a LOT of conversations about whether it's ok/fair/right to have kids if you might pass on a serious genetic disorder to them. Many people, like me, only find out that the chance is there after they have a kid with the disorder; then, they struggle with the ethics of having a second child. In my, admittedly rather different, case, I decided that there is no way than an answer can be right if it would have led to me not having my beautiful daughter. She is wonderful and her life is worth living. Some adults with cystic fibrosis have said it's terrible to have a child if there's a chance that the child may have CF, and that confuses me a lot, since those very same individuals say that their lives are worth living and they are glad that they were born. I guess where I'm going with this is: Is your life worth living? Are you glad that you were born? Would it be better if you'd never lived at all? If your life is on the whole a good thing, then your child's life presumably would be as well. And all of THAT assumes that your condition is both genetic and dominant (such that it's both caused by a broken gene you carry and that your husband not having said flaw would not suffice to prevent the child from experiencing illness) AND that your kid inherits it. You don't have a family history of RA so this doesn't sound likely to me. In your shoes, I believe that I would both have the child, and do so sooner rather than later.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2009 06:30
|
|
|
This sort of thinking kind of bothers me. It leads to the idea that you have to have as many kids as possible otherwise you are effectively causing the demise of hundreds of people by not getting pregnant each possible time. (Not only will the kid not exist, but neither will his kids or his kids' kids.) Who is to say if your parents didn't want to have kids that you wouldn't exist, maybe you would but you'd have different parents and different genetics (if you believe how you think and your personality is what makes you who you are). Not to get all D&D here, but if I think this way too much I feel really guilty. And you shouldn't have kids based on guilt. That said, I agree with Eia. Your kid is going to love you no matter what and won't blame you for having kids when you might possibly pass something on to them genetically. If you want a child, you should definitely have one and it does sound like sooner is a better idea.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2009 07:12
|
|
|
As somebody who has RA my concern is more about having children before I degenerate to badly or am in too much pain to take care of them. I know what risk factors I have and what possible genetic problems my children could have. I still choose to have children. In my situation I'm 27 have been married 8 years and we are finally talking about kids. It's been a struggle for me because I know my limits and if it were up to me I would have started with children about 5 years ago. I know my RA is getting worse as I am unmedicated for it. This is only because we are talking about the kids soon. I feel that the pain I go through every day is worth children. If you are going the medication route you will be ok for a long time. Just make sure you are planning your children as the medications can cause some serious defects. I was on Methotrexate and you have to be off of that for at least three months. With the genetics. Yes it's possible you could pass on RA, or it could turn in to some other autoimmune disease such as Psoriasis or Lupus. Heck my kids will get a double whammy I have the RA and My Husband has Psoriasis. Either way all that matters is that they are loved and parented to the best of your ability. Yikes what a wall!
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2009 17:53
|
|
|
qentiox posted:I guess I would ask myself if the disease is so bad that you wouldn't want to exist? I know that's kind of an existential thing now, considering you don't have kids and you actually exist now. Also, do the treatments make you feel well enough that you can function? I'd never thought of it that way before.. I mean, I have to say I *do* prefer existing! I don't how not existing feels, so I can't say for sure that existing is preferable, but I would guess that it is. I can function pretty normally most of the time. I may look at little silly, say, opening bottles or getting up and around in the mornings, but I guess I have just adapted my own way of doing things to avoid hurting myself. I guess my concern was that I wouldn't want my kids to have to love me DESPITE something.Eia posted:I guess where I'm going with this is: Is your life worth living? Are you glad that you were born? Would it be better if you'd never lived at all? If your life is on the whole a good thing, then your child's life presumably would be as well. This is very true, and again I'd never thought of it that way. My life is pretty good, I would say. Thank you for the perspective of someone who has already sort of been there.. Hearing that your daughter is happy and you are happy makes me feel better. Of course her life is worth living! I hadn't looked at it from that angle before, so thanks to you guys for that. Damiana posted:Your kid is going to love you no matter what and won't blame you for having kids when you might possibly pass something on to them genetically. If you want a child, you should definitely have one and it does sound like sooner is a better idea. Thank you, this is most likely very good advice. DachsieLove posted:Wow, I didn't expect to hear from anyone in the same situation! My hat is off to you for going completely unmedicated. I dropped the chemo a year ago, and since then I have quit everything else but one anti-inflammatory I am told is very safe, even up until the third trimester of a pregnancy. I would quit taking it before conceiving, however, just because I don't like the idea of it. But I have had to go a day or two without it before, and I can't hardly get out of bed. I've had to have my husband help me wash my hair and brush my teeth on those days. I couldn't get by without it, but with it, I manage pretty well. I wish you lots of luck and hope your kids will be free of both autoimmune diseases. Oh, and your wall of text has nothin' on mine!!Okay, well, you guys have all but made my decision for me. I'm sure my husband will be pleased, as he loves kids and can't wait to have some. And since this all started like a month before our wedding, he kind of entered into the marriage thinking we agreed on kids and if I had changed my mind because of the RA, I am pretty sure that would've been a BIG issue between us at some point. So my next question is-- What's the advice you'd give to someone like a year out? What's the order I need to be doing/taking things to be in good shape when the time comes? We are both in good physical shape and I quit drinking caffeine for other reasons about a month ago. I've never been a smoker or much of a drinker, but my husband smokes so if there's any legit reason involving babies I could cite to make him quit, that would be great. TL;DR - Thanks you guys, you're all awesome and made me feel alot better! What do I do now, being a year or so out?
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2009 18:52
|
|
|
sinistrality posted:So my next question is-- What's the advice you'd give to someone like a year out? What's the order I need to be doing/taking things to be in good shape when the time comes? We are both in good physical shape and I quit drinking caffeine for other reasons about a month ago. I've never been a smoker or much of a drinker, but my husband smokes so if there's any legit reason involving babies I could cite to make him quit, that would be great. According to my perinatalogist, it's never too early to start taking folic acid. In fact, she recommended that I start at least 6 months before trying, and then start pre-natals as soon as I started trying. Also, make the husband quit smoking before you start trying. Children of smokers are MUCH more likely to be asthmatic, suffer from recurring ear infections, and die from SIDS. Additionally, there are studies showing that a gestating mother's second-hand smoke exposure passes to the baby and can lead to low birth weight, premature birth, miscarriage, stillbirth, and babies being born with decreased lung function. http://parenting.ivillage.com/pregnancy/psafe/0,,midwife_47rn,00.html http://www1.umn.edu/perio/tobacco/secondhandsmoke.html I had a premature baby with low birth weight and decreased lung function for other reasons, and I really gotta say, that's a bag of tricks you DON'T want to buy into. Because he was so small, the breathing tube blew a hole in his lung (terribly common in preemies, because their lung walls are so weak), so he ended up with a chest tube. He's over 2 now and he's got a scar on his side from the chest tube. He was in NICU for a month, all hooked up to machines and pumps and bullshit. It's terrifying and heartbreaking and studies now show that parents of babies who spent more than 3 days in NICU have an ENORMOUSLY high rate of Acute Stress Disorder and PTSD. If there's anything to be done to avoid it, DO IT! He's healthy and happy now, but it was a long road to get here.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2009 19:44
|
|
|
How long does it take for your body to go back to normal after an IUD removal? I know your fertility can return immediately, but I'm worried about potential damage. Does anyone else have experience with this? I'm probably worrying over nothing, but I've been bleeding like a stuck pig since the 7th when the IUD was removed. I'm hoping it is just a very oddly timed, unusually heavy (even heavier than with the Paragard) period or something. If it doesn't stop in a couple of days I'm going to go back to the gynecologist.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2009 20:50
|
|
|
Call your gyn right away, just so you don't have to worry about it. That's a totally reasonable thing to check in about, and why not get it off your mind?
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2009 21:01
|
|
|
Gumby Orgy posted:How long does it take for your body to go back to normal after an IUD removal? I know your fertility can return immediately, but I'm worried about potential damage. Does anyone else have experience with this? Definitely call your gyn to set your mind at ease, if they can't see you at least you can probably talk to a nurse about your concerns. FWIW, my best friend had her IUD expel and had some bleeding/pain issues for a couple weeks, but ended up conceiving a few months later and had a completely normal pregnancy with no issues. ...So apparently my body functions like clockwork? This is my first cycle coming off the pill after almost 15 years and my period came on the EXACT day it would have had I been on the pill, and stopped at the exact time as well. Is that a GOOD thing? I wasn't able to start charting my temp for the cycle because I had an upper respiratory infection with a low-grade fever for almost 3 weeks. Husband and I are still on the fence about when we want to start officially trying. He's graduating in June, but I don't think I'd like to be pregnant AND worrying about him getting a job! I will be 29 in March and have terrible baby fever, but I also want to make sure we're financially and emotionally ready. I'm sure when I DO get pregnant I'll be terrified no matter how prepared we are, but I want to make smart decisions for our family too. It's so helpful to read that other people are going through the same issues we are.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2009 18:52
|
|
|
Well, it looks like I'm having a boy! He waved his wang at the sonographer
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2009 04:26
|
|
|
Awesome, congratulations, Azulita! Do you have other kids or is this your first? I cried and cried when Cecilia showed off her girliness at out ultrasound two weeks ago. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2009 04:49
|
|
|
Fire In The Disco posted:Awesome, congratulations, Azulita! Do you have other kids or is this your first? I cried and cried when Cecilia showed off her girliness at out ultrasound two weeks ago. This is my first
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2009 17:04
|
|
|
I almost forgot to update! I called my gyno on Friday and was told that everything should be fine but to monitor it. She said that I should abstain from sex until perhaps midway next week just to be sure to avoid post-IUD infections. Luckily the bleeding is now down to a trickle, so I feel a lot more comfortable and less worried. It looks like my girly parts are going to be okay! Now that I know that, I have to wonder whether it is legal for insurance plans to not cover pregnancy. I haven't checked my plan, but I read a comment on Jezebel where one of the readers didn't have prenatal coverage. Is this common? That doesn't seem like it would be legal. Perhaps she was being dramatic. Either way, I'll be checking my coverage.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2009 10:31
|
|
|
Gumby Orgy posted:I almost forgot to update! I am currently uninsured, but every plan I've been on covered it. In fact, my old plan covered it and the premium didn't even go up until after the birth. I have a hard time believing an insurance plan would refuse to cover a pregnancy, but who knows? The U.S. is hosed up like that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2009 01:11
|
|
|
according to someone I know and trust Azulita is Do What Now? (( ???? (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2009 03:25
|
|
|
Thanks for bringing unwanted drama in here. GTFO. In other news Butterbean 2.0 Attempt 1 = FAIL
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2009 03:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 06:34 |
|
|
Sorry to hear Chickalicious  Hope next month is it for you.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2009 04:52
|
|
