FASD in bio kids....

[Anonymous]

Hold onto that, PP, no matter what you may read about human development. Just hold tight and block your ears.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is so ridiculous.

Women until the 1970s drank regularly throughout their pregnancies. Yet myself nor any of my friends have FAS ... or autism for that matter.

https://preventionconversation.org/2017/09/04/what-does-history-teach-us-about-fetal-alcohol-spectrum-disorder/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is so ridiculous.

Women until the 1970s drank regularly throughout their pregnancies. Yet myself nor any of my friends have FAS ... or autism for that matter.

There were kids with SN, FASD, and much more but in the 70-80, they were hidden in separate schools or institutions so you may have not known. Yes, women did drink but it wasn't diagnosed much back then, nor is now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am 7 months pregnant and worry about this a lot. I didn't know I was pregnant until 8 weeks since I didn't miss a period until then, my 8 week dating ultrasound said I was 12 weeks along. I don't drink heavily, only .5-1 drink at a time with my husband, but i am afraid that one drink could have hit at the worst possible developmental moment. I guess we will see.

I highly doubt that it will be an issue if it was till 8 weeks. Its more heavy drinking or/and drug use especially the last 6 months of pregnancy from what I understand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Drinking before you know you are pregnant doesn't cause FASD, OP (unless you don't know until you are like, 6 months along).

Who told you that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is so ridiculous.

Women until the 1970s drank regularly throughout their pregnancies. Yet myself nor any of my friends have FAS ... or autism for that matter.

There were kids with SN, FASD, and much more but in the 70-80, they were hidden in separate schools or institutions so you may have not known. Yes, women did drink but it wasn't diagnosed much back then, nor is now.

How old are you? Everyone drank back then. I can remember my friends moms drinking when they were pregnant with younger siblings. No ASD, no ADHD, no FAS.

[Anonymous]

This article has some statistics about the incidence of FASD in middle class (2-5%) and lower class children (up to 40%).

https://www.statnews.com/2016/05/31/fetal-alcohol-spectrum-disorder/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No citation, I was told that about 8 weeks by my doctor, who I had no reason not to trust.

Maybe there is a follow-up question to ask your doctor about this.

Anonymous wrote: Maybe he only said it to me because he really didn't think the 2 drinks I had would cause birth defects. It's pretty scary to see that it can and does.

It does sounds from your citation though that the embryonic stage is separate from the fetal stage.

I'm not sure what you mean by this.

It's the same organism, just before or after a fairly arbitrarily-chosen point in time. Yes, the risks of alcohol as a teratogen differ depending on what organs are being formed or going through certain stages of development, but alcohol can have problematic effects in utero throughout the pregnancy.

In fact -- and I'm going to emphasize this not to be a jerk, but because it is important -- alcohol exposure in the first eight weeks of development is MORE likely to cause severe problems than exposure after that, although there is no "safe" time for such exposure.

e.g.,
"During the fetal stage, prenatal alcohol exposure still has the potential to negatively impact development, but much less than the massive developmental defects that can result from exposure during the embryonic stage."

Thank you for this.

[Anonymous]

There are no statistics that are reliable because reporting isn’t reliable and tests arent ethical. The reality is that kids with full blown FAS, only 20% are intellectually disabled as opposed to the 100% that are assumed to be. The diagnosis is so kids in stigma and unknowns it’s hard to know if it’s meaningful, not from all these junk scientists, and it’s not one I would seek for my child. Who on earth benefits?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are no statistics that are reliable because reporting isn’t reliable and tests arent ethical. The reality is that kids with full blown FAS, only 20% are intellectually disabled as opposed to the 100% that are assumed to be. The diagnosis is so kids in stigma and unknowns it’s hard to know if it’s meaningful, not from all these junk scientists, and it’s not one I would seek for my child. Who on earth benefits?

There are several recent studies that have found the incidence to be between 1-5%. These studies came out after my pregnancies. And frankly, they're frightening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are no statistics that are reliable because reporting isn’t reliable and tests arent ethical. The reality is that kids with full blown FAS, only 20% are intellectually disabled as opposed to the 100% that are assumed to be. The diagnosis is so kids in stigma and unknowns it’s hard to know if it’s meaningful, not from all these junk scientists, and it’s not one I would seek for my child. Who on earth benefits?

There are several recent studies that have found the incidence to be between 1-5%. These studies came out after my pregnancies. And frankly, they're frightening.

Of course they are, although that’s much lower than the ASD rate. The point here is also / how does a diagnosis serve a bio child? Or any child? That has not been answered in any meaningful way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are no statistics that are reliable because reporting isn’t reliable and tests arent ethical. The reality is that kids with full blown FAS, only 20% are intellectually disabled as opposed to the 100% that are assumed to be. The diagnosis is so kids in stigma and unknowns it’s hard to know if it’s meaningful, not from all these junk scientists, and it’s not one I would seek for my child. Who on earth benefits?

There are several recent studies that have found the incidence to be between 1-5%. These studies came out after my pregnancies. And frankly, they're frightening.

Of course they are, although that’s much lower than the ASD rate. The point here is also / how does a diagnosis serve a bio child? Or any child? That has not been answered in any meaningful way.

???? ASD rates are around 1%

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are no statistics that are reliable because reporting isn’t reliable and tests arent ethical. The reality is that kids with full blown FAS, only 20% are intellectually disabled as opposed to the 100% that are assumed to be. The diagnosis is so kids in stigma and unknowns it’s hard to know if it’s meaningful, not from all these junk scientists, and it’s not one I would seek for my child. Who on earth benefits?

There are several recent studies that have found the incidence to be between 1-5%. These studies came out after my pregnancies. And frankly, they're frightening.

Of course they are, although that’s much lower than the ASD rate. The point here is also / how does a diagnosis serve a bio child? Or any child? That has not been answered in any meaningful way.

In a short Google search, I came across numerous posts by adults with FAS who appreciate the self-knowledge and other posts or articles about adults parenting such children, as OP is. Labels can help. That's true for all sorts of diagnoses, including this one.

[Anonymous]

PP, 1-5% is much lower than 1%. There's a dash in it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are no statistics that are reliable because reporting isn’t reliable and tests arent ethical. The reality is that kids with full blown FAS, only 20% are intellectually disabled as opposed to the 100% that are assumed to be. The diagnosis is so kids in stigma and unknowns it’s hard to know if it’s meaningful, not from all these junk scientists, and it’s not one I would seek for my child. Who on earth benefits?

There are several recent studies that have found the incidence to be between 1-5%. These studies came out after my pregnancies. And frankly, they're frightening.

Of course they are, although that’s much lower than the ASD rate. The point here is also / how does a diagnosis serve a bio child? Or any child? That has not been answered in any meaningful way.

In a short Google search, I came across numerous posts by adults with FAS who appreciate the self-knowledge and other posts or articles about adults parenting such children, as OP is. Labels can help. That's true for all sorts of diagnoses, including this one.

Yes, but this one is a double edged sword.

FAS is somewhat difference because it's got clear physical signs. Yes, if your kid is walking around with physical features that would make it clear to anyone who meets them that they had a mother who drank during pregnancy, then they deserve to know so they can respond.

But OP isn't talking about kids with FAS, she's talking about kids who don't have physical features. Where speculating about whether or not their disabilities are alcohol related is much less helpful.