By Spike - 29/03/2011 18:08 - United States
Add a comment - Reply to : #
It depends on the genetics of the gene. typically when one person has it their children will either be a carrier or take on the disease. Though there are a lot of factors that play. But she does have a higher chance than he did because of genetics. Familial down syndrome runs in families, and descendants are more likely to obtain the disease. Perhaps the gene is like that. OP you better get that checked out (though I highly doubt you wouldn't know by now. I'm sure you've taken plenty of pain medicine before like Tylenol or something and would know)
76 and 77, 41 is saying that by OP Using the fact that her father/(her?) has a "one in a million" disease, that means that for every 1 OP there is an estimated number of people in china who also have it, by dividing the total population of china by one million. Therefore, 41 is correct in pointing out that the idea that the population of china is 16 billion, (leaving 16000 diseased citizens,) is ridiculous.
41 isn't wrong.... 16000x1000000=16,000,000,000. 39 stated if the gene was 1 in a million, then 16000 people in china would have it due to them having 16,000,000,000 people. though I'm not sure of china's population... But that is what I took from those two.
if it's one in a million, then it's a recessive gene, which would require your mom to have it as well to give it to you. and even then its 25% chance even then. the simple fact that you're a woman means you're XX, your mom will have almost definitely (cant say definitely because there's the chance she didn't, but statistically speaking would be near 0) have given you both of her safe XX. worst realistically speaking case scenario is you'd be a carrier...
Actually it's nothing like Down's syndrome, which is not a gene mutation, it's a complete extra chromosome. It is inherited but it can cause a lot of problems with pain medication, which you can't simply double the dose. You have to be very careful when taking pain medication, and it wouldn't necessarily be caught before now.
150, although the body is processing the medications quicker, I'm not quite sure it would be safe to have them twice as often. I'm assuming that there is still going to be traces of the medication in the body although the effects have worn off, which would result in an overdose if she took it too often.
After 29 years, I would think you would know if you had it or not.
^^ Because there is a chance that she might have taken medication before in her life, like an aspirin, or something & would have realized it. Although I can see how it's possible how a person might never know. Like you said, they could have never taken medication or, I mean, I really don't know anything about this condition at all & whether it would work the same on pain relief for mild pain (like Tylenol or Advil) & pain relief for severe pain like, say, Vicodin or even more intense pain killers.
she might not know no matter how old she is. i'm 18 and i can't take tylenol or anything similar to it because i have a hypersensitivity to it (it gives me a fever instead of reducing it). Though I would imagine the disease would work for all medications instead of just pain meds. Would have to research it more if OP had told us what the disease was.
That is only until you hit a certain temperature or depending on how your body works. In most cases though if you are running a fever of 101 degrees f for longer than a couple of days or if you creep up towards 104f a doctor is going to say the fever needs to be brought down.
#179 - not when the fever hits 106 and typically rises. OP, have your doc check and see. If you do happen to have it, they can more than likely work with you; ie allow you to have a higher dosage but give it to you in increments to ensure it lasts through the birth. You have options besides natural childbirth if that is not what you want to do.
I gave birth twice without pain medication or epidural. It is very possible. You go through that extreme pain then when you have your new child you completey forget all the pain you were in. Now afterward, ya I was doped the hell up with whatever they were giving me.
I've never understood this precious smugness some women have over how they give birth or plan to give birth without pain killers. "All that pain is worth it" - Well, I expect it is, and, sure, women have given birth for millenia without pain relief, but I fully intend to take whatever the hell is offered to me because if I don't have to suffer this grotesque agony that people seem to PRIDE themselves on going through then why the hell would I? Also, at the end of the day, I don't understand why people even care by which method another mother gave birth because, surely, one would think, the baby - the result of it all - is a million times more worth talking about than comparing and criticising each other's birth stories and plans. My mother never told us how we were born before because it wasn't at all important to her - what was important is that she has three grown up, healthy, happy children that have become pretty robust adults. It was only in the past year it somehow came up that I was an emergency ceasarian, my sister was elective and my brother was delivered under edipural and anything else they could give her. Did my mother's want to not experience pain in birth in any way prevent her from being a good parent? Dear God no. I will never understand the smugness of this ongoing conflict. Giving birth, whilst the first thing most women will do as a parent, does not generally fall under the catagory of "parenting".
cass85, you sound like the only sane person here. I totally do not comprehend how making the birth process easier for the mother can be considered something bad. What, if a woman doesn't feel pain during childbirth (which in turn makes her more relaxed and also prevents pain shock related issues), she isn't "a real mother"? Damn mompetitors. A result is important, but the process is important as well.
200, that just means that you're an adequate person. The people here who bash OP for her wanting to have medicated birth are the ones it was addressed to (for example, comment #19). "Mompetitors" make it sound like "natural childbirth" is the only correct thing to do, and some of those even go as far as to claim that things like c-section are "unnatural" and "harmful to the baby", while they're in fact lifesaving for the said baby's mother.
One in a million besides no pain no gain and from your pain comes an enfant who willl love you till hes 10 and tell you to stay outta his life till 21 :)
Make sure your OB knows! And don't worry...back in the day women gave birth without ANY medication!
I love birth plans. The more specific the better. Your ob will love it too. Especially ones refusing this intervention or that modification. I REALLY enjoy plans that exclude an IV. That way, when the patient or baby crashes, it adds to the excitement and memories. I usually add an operative consent to my extensive birth plans. Adding the time of the c-section to the plan is pretty helpful too.
Yup, I plan on going med. free, too #73. I've heard a lot about epidurals messing up women's backs. Also, women died during child birth years ago because of doctors' uncleanliness, and also genuine lack of medical knowledge. They would TEAR the placenta out because they thought it was a bad thing, but really doing that caused major bleeding and killed many women. The placenta gets expelled from the body on its own time.
Comment moderated for rule-breaking.Show it anyway
Birth is a natural process. It is NOT an illness or an injury. Thousands of women have and STILL DO give birth without painkillers. Suck it up, princess.
Oh for the love of all that is holy. Why should she have to suffer during childbirth when there have been advances in modern medicine to help? Epidurals are wonderful to help your body relax and do what it needs to do, as well as helping lower blood pressures in pre-eclamspia. How do pain medicines cause vaginal tearing? If you don't want pain medicine, lovely. However, it is absolutely ok to plan on pain management during labor. Knowing this family history will help her OB and anesthesia manage her.
I don't get why "Women have given birth for thousands of years without pain medication" is considered a good argument for why women shouldn't take the medication. There are plenty of things that were done for thousands of years before science and medicine made advancements. For example, doctors used to bleed people to relieve them of diseases. That sometimes worked, does that mean we should go back to doing that? I personally don't think so.
There's no reason NOT to plan pain meds into your delivery. Why the hell should we have to suffer through that when modern medicine can stop that? Are you going to have surgery one day and say "No thanks, Doc. I don't need anesthesia. Just give me a strap of leather to bite down on like they used to do."? I don't think so. If you don't want to take any pain meds during your delivery, that's fine, but there's no reason why every woman should be like that. I originally wanted to have a water birth with no pain meds at all, but then I realized that I can't even get out of bed for a couple days because of cramps on my period and I have to take Vicadin just to get through it. So fuck that.
162-You are a moron and a weenie. Let's say that the baby's heartrate crashes and mom needs a stat section. Which do you think is better for the baby-dosing up the epidural or general anesthesia? I'll give you a hint, it's not general anesthesia. Stop speaking out of your ass.
...#66, how the fuck do you people give birth? When I had my baby, I used gas and air. It's not pain relief; it makes you high as a fucking kite so that the pain, really, is pretty uninteresting. I'm sure women 'back in the day' had their own tricks of the trade for getting through long, boring, goddamn painful births, it's just a shame that some women need to take everything to the extreme and make life a lot harder for themselves. Also, please tell me you've actually had children so you're not one of these women who forms righteous views on something they know nothing about.