shape
carat
color
clarity

Calling all the Pregnant PS''ers

Date: 1/28/2009 3:31:52 PM
Author: mela lu
CAR SEAT QUESTION:

My SIL gave me her 2007 ''Peg Perego Primo Viaggio SIP'' car seat.
How can I find out if it''s still ''good'' or not?

Thanks to anyone who can point me in the right direction.
Don''t they have expiry dates written on them somewhere? Or you can probably call the company or look it up on their website.
 
Good question mela...I think we will also take the infant carseats from a friend so I will want to check also...I figured not to spend 400bucks on that since its only good for a few months but I still want to make sure they are safe. I think all brands are different but it probably is on a tag somewhere on on bottom...I would call the company as well. Let us know if u find out
 
Date: 1/28/2009 10:56:04 AM
Author: dreamer_dachsie

Date: 1/28/2009 9:44:20 AM
Author: neatfreak


Date: 1/28/2009 8:30:57 AM
Author: Pandora II
Interesting.


I know my hospitals miscarriage rate is extremely low for both amnio and CVS - although CVS is a bit higher. However they still quote the 1:100 v 1:50 miscarriage rates.

Maybe someone quoted you the wrong numbers then, because those aren''t extremely low IMO. I''ve also heard the same numbers that llysser and DD have.
Or, that is the rate iof m/c for people who have the procedure full stop, NOT the adjusted rate of *increase* in m/c due to the procedure. So the commonly touted 2% for amnio is the total, but the actual increase is rates is 0.7%, which is actualy not statistically different from zero according to what I read.
They just gave the m/c rate for all people who have the procedure full stop - 1% for amnio and 2% for CVS.

The tech did tell me that the rates at my hospital were exceptionally low (which I would believe given that it is rated as the best in London and is a major teaching centre).

I wasn''t worried anyway, if my numbers had been less than 1:1000 I would have had the CVS anyway.
 
Date: 1/28/2009 6:31:14 PM
Author: Pandora II

They just gave the m/c rate for all people who have the procedure full stop - 1% for amnio and 2% for CVS.
This is not important for anyone here, just academic
3.gif
but those numbers then make sense if they are just "Okay, of the women who had the procedure how many m/c?". At 12 weeks, baseline m/c rates are probably double what they are at 18 weeks, when CVS and amnio are done, respectively. So the double rate for CVS is probably misleading. For women actually trying to weigh whether to have to prodecures, they need to know the *added* risk, and that is the much lower number that NF and I have read.

I think it is very uninformative to tell women only the overall % of m/c for the two procedures, because it makes them seem more risky than they are. I can think of two reasons for this: a) saving money by scaring women off; b) discouraging abortion by scaring women off.
 
I had a weird experince this morning - I was lying in bed on my back and felt this strange sensation quite high up on my stomach - about 3 fingers above my navel. I put my hand down to feel what it was and there was a little lump sticking out, so I pushed it - and promptly got kicked twice! I think I felt a little foot.
9.gif


DH is hoping it might happen again when he''s there so he can feel it.


I sleep mainly on my back as it hurts too much on my sides - I''m normally a left-side sleeper. My appointment with the physio has come through for 18th Feb - I am hoping that they can come up with something as the pain is driving me crazy. It feels almost as bad as when I had pleurisy (and spent a month in hospital on morphine). The worst thing is that when I fall asleep I will turn over and then the pain wakes me up again. Grrrrr.

In other news, I have a date for the final stage of the internal procedure with my employer - I go in front of their panel at 2.30pm on the 4th Feb. I probably have to wait a few days for the judgement (it''s not legally meaningful, but if it goes in my favour it should help things) and then I apply to the courts for a tribunal hearing date.

I spoke to the court on Monday and they tell me that it''s a 4 month wait - so basically the court date and my EDD should be about the same. I will admit to bawling my eyes out for a few hours when I heard that. This has been going on now since I was 7 weeks pg and the thought that I will spend my ENTIRE pregnancy fighting this was a bit crushing. One day at a time I suppose....

Dust on the 4th would be hugely appreciated!
 
Date: 1/28/2009 6:37:55 PM
Author: dreamer_dachsie


Date: 1/28/2009 6:31:14 PM
Author: Pandora II

They just gave the m/c rate for all people who have the procedure full stop - 1% for amnio and 2% for CVS.
This is not important for anyone here, just academic
3.gif
but those numbers then make sense if they are just 'Okay, of the women who had the procedure how many m/c?'. At 12 weeks, baseline m/c rates are probably double what they are at 18 weeks, when CVS and amnio are done, respectively. So the double rate for CVS is probably misleading. For women actually trying to weigh whether to have to prodecures, they need to know the *added* risk, and that is the much lower number that NF and I have read.

I think it is very uninformative to tell women only the overall % of m/c for the two procedures, because it makes them seem more risky than they are. I can think of two reasons for this: a) saving money by scaring women off; b) discouraging abortion by scaring women off.
That's odd, DD. Several of my friends who've had babies or are pregnant have said the opposite; they felt pressured to receive the screenings, even if they didn't want them.

I guess all Dr.s are different. You'd think Drs. would want reasons to bill insurance, though.
2.gif
 
Date: 1/28/2009 6:37:55 PM
Author: dreamer_dachsie

Date: 1/28/2009 6:31:14 PM
Author: Pandora II

They just gave the m/c rate for all people who have the procedure full stop - 1% for amnio and 2% for CVS.
This is not important for anyone here, just academic
3.gif
but those numbers then make sense if they are just ''Okay, of the women who had the procedure how many m/c?''. At 12 weeks, baseline m/c rates are probably double what they are at 18 weeks, when CVS and amnio are done, respectively. So the double rate for CVS is probably misleading. For women actually trying to weigh whether to have to prodecures, they need to know the *added* risk, and that is the much lower number that NF and I have read.

I think it is very uninformative to tell women only the overall % of m/c for the two procedures, because it makes them seem more risky than they are. I can think of two reasons for this: a) saving money by scaring women off; b) discouraging abortion by scaring women off.
I would think that it is definitely reason A in the UK. The hospital has a certain budget and so they aren''t too keen to spend money if they don''t see a reason for it.

They spent a lot of time convincing me not to do the CVS - I can only believe that it was a cost issue. Termination is easily available in the UK and free on the NHS. You might get the odd pro-life advocate, but none of the people I spoke with were.

I agree that the base-line m/c rate is a bad one - you have the ''natural'' miscarriages, the miscarriages that happen spontaneously due to abnormality that happen before the parents have decided what to do - but after the CVS/amnio, and then what I would believe is the very small number of miscarriages due to the actual procedure.

It may also be the case that hospitals don''t want to investigate too closely for fear of litigation...
 
Date: 1/28/2009 6:42:15 PM
Author: fisherofmengirly


Date: 1/28/2009 6:37:55 PM
Author: dreamer_dachsie




Date: 1/28/2009 6:31:14 PM
Author: Pandora II

They just gave the m/c rate for all people who have the procedure full stop - 1% for amnio and 2% for CVS.
This is not important for anyone here, just academic
3.gif
but those numbers then make sense if they are just 'Okay, of the women who had the procedure how many m/c?'. At 12 weeks, baseline m/c rates are probably double what they are at 18 weeks, when CVS and amnio are done, respectively. So the double rate for CVS is probably misleading. For women actually trying to weigh whether to have to prodecures, they need to know the *added* risk, and that is the much lower number that NF and I have read.

I think it is very uninformative to tell women only the overall % of m/c for the two procedures, because it makes them seem more risky than they are. I can think of two reasons for this: a) saving money by scaring women off; b) discouraging abortion by scaring women off.
That's odd, DD. Several of my friends who've had babies or are pregnant have said the opposite; they felt pressured to receive the screenings, even if they didn't want them.

I guess all Dr.s are different. You'd think Drs. would want reasons to bill insurance, though.
2.gif
DD and I may be considering the 'cost' thing differently as we both live in countries with state health-care systems.

In the UK, every procedure a doctor carries out will have a cost that comes out of his/her department's budget - hence why it can be hard to get scans/x-rays/specialist tests: they need to have an actual reason to think they are needed, rather than using a 'let's rule things out' approach (if that makes sense).

Plus our waiting lists are horribly long - it can easily take 8 months to get an MRI scan - and due to understaffing there may not be enough capacity to carry out tests that aren't particularly indicated.
 
Fisher - Pandora is in England, where medical care is taken care of the by the gov''t. So there is no insurance to bill. Which might explain the difference in attitudes of the doctors over there vs. over here.

Pandora - I''m sorry you''ve been struggling with your ex-employer this whole time. That just stinks.
 
Pandora, I''m so sorry you''re having to deal with this stress while pregnant. I guess the good thing is that you''re not a pushover and you''re fighting for what you deserve. Most people would roll over and play dead.

I''m the same sort of sleeper as you. I love being on my back. It''s the only time my back feels straight and normal, for once! My left side is my favorite of the sides. I have my physio tomorrow. I will let you know how that goes.

Lots of dust for the 4th! I''m curious to see what the outcome is!
 
Oh, I totally wasn''t even thinking about that. I''d hate to have to wait 8 months for an MRI if I needed one! I''m just not sure what the answer is to the medical issues in this world.

I forget that we''re all over the place on this site. And I knew Pandora was from Europe, but I often forget DD is in Canada.
 
I occasionally freak out that baby isn''t moving enough too. And then the baby will start going all ninja on me the next day to make up for it or something.


Date: 1/28/2009 6:37:55 PM
Author: dreamer_dachsie

Date: 1/28/2009 6:31:14 PM
Author: Pandora II

They just gave the m/c rate for all people who have the procedure full stop - 1% for amnio and 2% for CVS.
This is not important for anyone here, just academic
3.gif
but those numbers then make sense if they are just ''Okay, of the women who had the procedure how many m/c?''. At 12 weeks, baseline m/c rates are probably double what they are at 18 weeks, when CVS and amnio are done, respectively. So the double rate for CVS is probably misleading. For women actually trying to weigh whether to have to prodecures, they need to know the *added* risk, and that is the much lower number that NF and I have read.

I think it is very uninformative to tell women only the overall % of m/c for the two procedures, because it makes them seem more risky than they are. I can think of two reasons for this: a) saving money by scaring women off; b) discouraging abortion by scaring women off.
I''d heard the numbers that Pandora quoted before and wasn''t even aware that they were overall risk and not increased risk - it really misled me!

NF - your boys are adorable!!
30.gif
 
NF
Max and Dex are too cute for words.
They are going to handsome little guys
30.gif
30.gif

Dex is the thinker for sure -- he''s got wise eyes
5.gif
 
Date: 1/28/2009 6:42:15 PM
Author: fisherofmengirly

That''s odd, DD. Several of my friends who''ve had babies or are pregnant have said the opposite; they felt pressured to receive the screenings, even if they didn''t want them.
I suspect that the screening tests like NT which are non-invasive could be pushed for very different reasons than the invasive CVS and amnio, which involve sticking a needle into the amniotic sac! But the whole insurance issue may be the main reason why women in the US may be pressured more than women in Canada or the UK.

And not to start a debate about the pros or cons socialized versus not medical care, but in Canada at least they use what is called a triage system to determine who sees specialists and uses equipment first. Generally speaking, this triage system is based on medical need. So if you have cancer or they think you may have a stroke or a blood clot or anything else life threatening, you receive treatment and see the specialist that day or that week! Of course, this bumps others down the waiting list. And if you need knee replacement surgery or anything like that which is not life threatening, then you can wait 6-12 months for surgery. It isn''t perfect, that is for sure, but *everyone* receives care and you never have to worry about insurance. If you are sick or injured and require any type of medical help (with some exceptions), you will receive the highest standard of care as a matter of course and every procedure is paid for in full. For example, my grandfather had cancer and saw every specialist under the sun, received top notch treatments, and when he was near the end of his life, he was able to be at home and received nursing care during the day and night--and all of this was covered by gov''t insurance and anyone, regardless of income, would have had the same care. Just wanted to point out this other side of the waiting game.

Pandora The subtle differences between UK and Canada are interesting to me. For example, we actually have a two-tier system to a degree in the sense that some services are not covered by government insurance and so you generally either pay for them out of pocket or have private insurance to cover them. An example is physiotherapy (unless it is related to a surgery or something). If I want to see a physio I can see one within a couple days! But I must use my husband''s insurance to pay for it. I think a broader range of services may be covered in the UK.
 
NF I cannot get enough pictures of those little niblets! I can''t wait to see them pork up as they get older, I love little tiny babies and I love nice big fat babies too!
 
Date: 1/28/2009 8:21:47 PM
Author: dreamer_dachsie


Date: 1/28/2009 6:42:15 PM
Author: fisherofmengirly

That's odd, DD. Several of my friends who've had babies or are pregnant have said the opposite; they felt pressured to receive the screenings, even if they didn't want them.
I suspect that the screening tests like NT which are non-invasive could be pushed for very different reasons than the invasive CVS and amnio, which involve sticking a needle into the amniotic sac! But the whole insurance issue may be the main reason why women in the US may be pressured more than women in Canada or the UK.

And not to start a debate about the pros or cons socialized versus not medical care, but in Canada at least they use what is called a triage system to determine who sees specialists and uses equipment first. Generally speaking, this triage system is based on medical need. So if you have cancer or they think you may have a stroke or a blood clot or anything else life threatening, you receive treatment and see the specialist that day or that week! Of course, this bumps others down the waiting list. And if you need knee replacement surgery or anything like that which is not life threatening, then you can wait 6-12 months for surgery. It isn't perfect, that is for sure, but *everyone* receives care and you never have to worry about insurance. If you are sick or injured and require any type of medical help (with some exceptions), you will receive the highest standard of care as a matter of course and every procedure is paid for in full. For example, my grandfather had cancer and saw every specialist under the sun, received top notch treatments, and when he was near the end of his life, he was able to be at home and received nursing care during the day and night--and all of this was covered by gov't insurance and anyone, regardless of income, would have had the same care. Just wanted to point out this other side of the waiting game.

Pandora The subtle differences between UK and Canada are interesting to me. For example, we actually have a two-tier system to a degree in the sense that some services are not covered by government insurance and so you generally either pay for them out of pocket or have private insurance to cover them. An example is physiotherapy (unless it is related to a surgery or something). If I want to see a physio I can see one within a couple days! But I must use my husband's insurance to pay for it. I think a broader range of services may be covered in the UK.
Indeed, two sides to every story. I do wonder if there's a better option out there for both systems, though.

I haven't heard as much about it in recent months (what with ALL my friends being pregnant at the same time, I should be hearing it more) but I remember several friends a few years back being really upset that they were basically being told that amnio was the only way to go. Of course, it should be offered to those who may need it for whatever reason. But I do feel like here in the states there is often a push for a procedure that's not necessarily needed. And I can only imagine it's because of insurance kickbacks.

I was looking through the "pregnancy packet" at the center that I'll be using, and it gives a brief description of every procedure along the way, what each visit will entail, that sort of thing. What I found interesting was that nearly every scan/test/procedure listed was noted to be "recommended, but not required." Haha. It's my hope that they'll be understanding of those of us who choose to be as non-invasive as possible with our little ones.

**
Hey, do most people in Canada have private insurance, or insurance through work for the medical issues that are not covered by the socialized program? Just interested.
 
Date: 1/28/2009 8:21:47 PM
Author: dreamer_dachsie

Date: 1/28/2009 6:42:15 PM
Author: fisherofmengirly

That''s odd, DD. Several of my friends who''ve had babies or are pregnant have said the opposite; they felt pressured to receive the screenings, even if they didn''t want them.
I suspect that the screening tests like NT which are non-invasive could be pushed for very different reasons than the invasive CVS and amnio, which involve sticking a needle into the amniotic sac! But the whole insurance issue may be the main reason why women in the US may be pressured more than women in Canada or the UK.

And not to start a debate about the pros or cons socialized versus not medical care, but in Canada at least they use what is called a triage system to determine who sees specialists and uses equipment first. Generally speaking, this triage system is based on medical need. So if you have cancer or they think you may have a stroke or a blood clot or anything else life threatening, you receive treatment and see the specialist that day or that week! Of course, this bumps others down the waiting list. And if you need knee replacement surgery or anything like that which is not life threatening, then you can wait 6-12 months for surgery. It isn''t perfect, that is for sure, but *everyone* receives care and you never have to worry about insurance. If you are sick or injured and require any type of medical help (with some exceptions), you will receive the highest standard of care as a matter of course and every procedure is paid for in full. For example, my grandfather had cancer and saw every specialist under the sun, received top notch treatments, and when he was near the end of his life, he was able to be at home and received nursing care during the day and night--and all of this was covered by gov''t insurance and anyone, regardless of income, would have had the same care. Just wanted to point out this other side of the waiting game.

Pandora The subtle differences between UK and Canada are interesting to me. For example, we actually have a two-tier system to a degree in the sense that some services are not covered by government insurance and so you generally either pay for them out of pocket or have private insurance to cover them. An example is physiotherapy (unless it is related to a surgery or something). If I want to see a physio I can see one within a couple days! But I must use my husband''s insurance to pay for it. I think a broader range of services may be covered in the UK.
Sounds almost identical to our system - fantastic if you have something urgent, but a PITA if it''s something long-term and not life threatening.

You can go private in the UK, but I actually prefer to know that there is a legitimate reason for things. For example, out of every 10,000 people who visit their GP with back pain, one 1 will actually be a good candidate for surgery. I was glad to know that my neurosurgeon was tinkering with my spine because of clinical need, not because he fancied a new conservatory and the insurance company would stump up.

It''s unusual to have private insurance here - some companies pay it for their employees, but it doesn''t cover any pre-existing conditions and they wriggle out of paying whenever they can.

Things like physio, acupuncture etc people will often pay out of pocket for - I''ve been lucky and always had them covered on the NHS. That said, I will have waited around 6 weeks to see the physio this time, if I''d been prepared to pay I could have seen one within days - I prefer to see the hospital''s physio though.

As far as meds are concerned, we pay around $12 for each item on a prescription - however pensioners, children, women who are pregnant or have had a child in the last 12 months, and people with certain conditions (diabetes, epilepsy etc) get them for free. Contraceptives are free for everyone.

I have a pre-pay for mine which costs $150 a year and covers any meds I need.

However, not all medications are available which has caused a lot of problems recently especially with a couple of the new cancer drugs which you can only get if you can afford to pay for them.

I''m not the greatest fan of the NHS - I prefer the system they have in the Netherlands (social insurance) - but it is great that no-one will ever go without treatment due to lack of money. And sometimes the system works incredibly well - I cannot fault my maternity care and the huge amount of support that is being put into place for after the baby arrives (guess I''m getting my money''s worth from all the taxes I''ve paid!)
 
6.gif
I didn''t know DD was in Canada!!!

I had my first OMG I''m having a baby moment today. We got a company wide email about our annual all employee meeting. These meetings are awesome because they normall bring in all of our field employees and some international employees. It''s all very exciting.

So our admin sends out the calendar invite so we can all put it in our calendar and I accepted. She sends me an email back saying:

What are you doing? Your baby is due on the 13th.

This meeting is for July 16th. I totally forgot
6.gif
 
Some websites say I''m in the 3rd trimester today, so I''m going with that! I''m officially in my 3rd trimester! Woohoo!!

I find it amazing that if she were born right now, she''d have an 85% chance of survival. I don''t want to test that statistic though, of course.

Poll:

For those that don''t know, Alila (uh-ly-la) is our name we have picked out. DH wants to call her Ali (Al-lee) for short. This makes no sense to me because Ali isn''t pronounced in the name Alila at all. Just because it''s spelled that way doesn''t mean that should be the nickname. Agree or disagree? I bet we will end up calling her Lila for short which has been my number choice for the full name since I was a little girl. DH doesn''t LIKE Lila which just ticks me off because he likes Alila??? He is driving me nuts with his ridiculous opinions and he thinks I''M the one who doesn''t get the whole Ali-Alila thing. Goodness gracious.
 
Just poppin in to tell hot mama Fiery that she has a Who''s Who thread and we''re waiting!

Over and out!
 
Date: 1/29/2009 7:23:25 AM
Author: fisherofmengirly
Hey, do most people in Canada have private insurance, or insurance through work for the medical issues that are not covered by the socialized program? Just interested.
I would say the asnwer is probably "no"... usually it is people working for larger companies that have this type of extra insurance. If you work for a small company or are self-employed you don''t get it, probably a lot like the US system! I forgot that gov''t insurance doesn''t cover prescriptions, though you can get a tax credit if you use a lot of meds. Private insurance covers prescriptions though.
 
Date: 1/29/2009 10:49:30 AM
Author: Courtneylub
Some websites say I'm in the 3rd trimester today, so I'm going with that! I'm officially in my 3rd trimester! Woohoo!!

I find it amazing that if she were born right now, she'd have an 85% chance of survival. I don't want to test that statistic though, of course.

Poll:

For those that don't know, Alila (uh-ly-la) is our name we have picked out. DH wants to call her Ali (Al-lee) for short. This makes no sense to me because Ali isn't pronounced in the name Alila at all. Just because it's spelled that way doesn't mean that should be the nickname. Agree or disagree? I bet we will end up calling her Lila for short which has been my number choice for the full name since I was a little girl. DH doesn't LIKE Lila which just ticks me off because he likes Alila??? He is driving me nuts with his ridiculous opinions and he thinks I'M the one who doesn't get the whole Ali-Alila thing. Goodness gracious.
This nickname issue was a big reason we nixed a lot of names! For example, we really liked Rhiannon, but then everyone kept saying, "Oh we can call her Rhia!" and I was like, "If I wanted our girl called Rhia we would have named her Rhia!" LOL! So we went with Fiona because I think it is easier to say somehow and so maybe not as nick-nameable... I guess they would call he "Fee" but that is obviously a nickname and not a real name, so I am okay with that...

As for your actual question
3.gif
, I agree with you!

I also have another comment based on my own experience... I have a name that many people cannot figure out how to pronounce based on how it is spelled and this has been annoying to me in my life... I love my name, but hate when people mispronounce it. Based on how Alila is spelled, I assumed it was pronounced "Ah-lee-la" not "Uh-ly-la"... You have probably already thought of this, but spelling it with a "y" may make this easier for some: Alyla. Anyways, just thought I'd mention that. In the end, who cares, people will probably mispronounce it no matter what! tee hee! ETA I love the name you chose though, just to make that clear!

35w 4d
23.gif
 
Date: 1/28/2009 3:31:52 PM
Author: mela lu
CAR SEAT QUESTION:


My SIL gave me her 2007 ''Peg Perego Primo Viaggio SIP'' car seat.

How can I find out if it''s still ''good'' or not?


Thanks to anyone who can point me in the right direction.

PSA:

I contacted Peg Perego (Canada) via email and got a prompt response.

"The expiry date on the car seat is 5 yrs from the manufacture date
on the seat. If you have anymore questions, please feel free to call our
customer service line and we will be glad to help you. We are open from
Monday to Friday 9:00 am to 4:00 pm."

I suggest you gals contact the manufacturer directly for your carseats ''expiry date''. That way, it''s straight from the horses mouth.

9.gif
 
Date: 1/28/2009 2:19:10 PM
Author: mela lu

PAGING LINDSAY: where did you find those gorgeous burp cloths online? the lemon yellow ones and the beautiful pink florals ones?
31.gif


***BUMPING***for Lindsey
 
Hey I forgot to mention that my bay shower is this weekend! How crazy is that... I simply cannot believe that I will be considered full term in only 10 more days! So I could have a baby in anywhere from 10 days to 6.5 weeks! Eeek!
 
Wow DD these weeks are just flying by. I can''t wait to meet your little one. I''ve always found showers to be a lot of fun. Are you registered? Have you been stalking your registry
31.gif
 
HEE!! Congrats Dreamer! I know I don''t "know" you in real life, but I just *feel* like you''ve gone through your pregnancy with such grace and calm. You are beautiful baby!!!

Tell us more about your shower? Any info yet? Did you register? What did you register for? (I ask because I''m still putting together my ''list'' of needs/wants)

YEY on "full term" (in 10 days).
36.gif
Can''t wait to meet your little (boy) baby
11.gif
. I''m sticking to my gut feeling on this one...
 
Mela- thanks for the info...I will do the same once I get the seats ;)

Court- I agree with DD on the spelling ..I would pronounce it correctly if it were Alyla...but either way beautiful original name! Congrats on 3rd tri!...how many weeks are u again??

DD- u are so close..I can''t take it! Enjoy your shower and maybe we can get pics?? ;)

I am counting down til next
U/s lol...
I was watching The View today and sherri shepard (who also did ivf with her son) said he was a preemie at 25 wks! So that gives me some hope that im almost at a point where if g-d forbid it happens..there is a chance...but I don''t wanna even think it...just take week by week..so far so good.
 
Thanks guys! Yup I registered. Like you mela it was an ordeal trying to figure out what the heck to put on the list! I used Tacori''s list from the "baby finds" thread as a starting point, and also Babies R Us has a list on their website or instore that you can use. Actually, Mela, since you live in TO you MUST MUST register at Baby Proofing Plus (http://www.babyproofingplus.com/). Their website sucks but the store is amazing, they have two locations. So much better than Babies R Us. Its too far from us unfortunately
15.gif
but you really should visit.

Fiery I have stalked my registry a little and so far some good big items are bought but people I know will either buy us what they *want* to buy us, or they will buy at the last minute so it isn''t surprising to me that the registry hasn''t been used that much.

I have been really fortunate that we haven''t had to buy ANYTHING for our baby yet! Can you believe it? Between grandparents and friends, we have gotten everything either given to us as a hand-me-down or bought for us. I can''t believe how lucky we are. Money is tight for us with my mat leave coming up (I am taking at least 10 months) and so it is so amazing that people are helping like this.

NYC I will take pictures and post them for sure! I don''t know what to expect. My mother is law is having the shower and my sister is law is helping out. I''m sure it will be lovely, they are both really great people. My family and friends all live on the other side of the country so I have been lucky that DH''s huge family is so close and also so nice. They have been great ever since DH and I started dating 4 years ago!

Mela LOL about "grace"... I think I have had an easy pregnancy so far (knock wood!) and that makes it easier. The last few weeks have been harder because of the pelvic pain. I really can''t do much of anything physically, so DH has had to basically wait on my hand and foot
31.gif
He likes it, though, and even announced that he likes looking after me because it makes him feel like he is helping grow the baby! He is very sweet.

Today I have my midwife appintment where they will test for Group B Staph. Apparently about 40% of preggos have this bacteria in their nether regions, and if you have it, they want you to take IV antibiotics during the birth to prevent the baby from getting infected. The literature is not very clear that this is a useful intervention, but I am not willing to say, "No" to the antibiotics if I have it. So please everyone cross your fingers I don''t have it... that is the last hurdle in the way of having the home birth I would prefer, since if I need antibiotics we will definitely need to be in the hospital!
 
Hmmm, I would''ve possibly reconsidered the spelling if we hadn''t already had her name emboirdered on a few things. Plus, I''ve always loved the name Lila. Would you have questioned the pronounciation on Lila as well? I don''t think Lee when I see Li, so I''m curious.

Wow Dreamer!! 35 weeks 4 days!
36.gif


NYC, I''m 27 weeks today!
 
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Top