Anonymous wrote:No one is responding that they've taken it because I'm betting a lot of posters here think it's stupid. Why is it so important to you to know the gender than you can't wait an extra few weeks? Or even wait till 20 weeks? Does it matter that much to you? If I was going to spend money on a test I would want to make sure it was 100% accurate and I would wait until I could get that test. Like pp said you can negotiate an oop rate with the companies now, almost everyone gets the NIPT. My sister in law had her results by 11.5 weeks a few months ago.

First of all, have had a baby in the past 5 years?

Gender is included in the NIPT genetic screening results. The results are sent to you directly via email. The first question they ask is if you want to find out the gender - if you answer no, you are informed that gender is included in the NIPT report so you will need to wait until your next t appointment to see your results with your doctor. If you answer that Yes, you do want to know the gender, you can see the genetic screening results right then and there.

Why would you wait?

It’s stupid to place so much value on being surprised by the gender that you would choose to wait until your next appointment (possibly weeks!) to find out if there’s a genetic issue with the baby. Be an adult.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think I'd bother to find out two weeks earlier than you find out with the NIPT.

Right?! What's a two week difference, for accurate results that have an actual medical upside too?

So you still didn't actually answer my question so I'm not sure why you even felt the need to comment.

But my practice won't even draw for NIPT until 12 weeks. Then it takes 1-2 weeks to get the results so it's not a 2 week difference.

That’s really backwards.

You need to find a new practice. I did it at 10 weeks and received the results over email within 48 hours.

I’m the PP - I just wanted to add that this was about 2 months ago in Rockville. The results of the NIPT were available very fast. There’s no reason to wait weeks for ANY results. Also, this is a genetic screening (not just a gender test) so you NEED to know if there’s an issue as soon as possible. It’s downright irresponsible to wait until AFTER the first trimester to find out the genetic screening results.

No one is responding that they've taken it because I'm betting a lot of posters here think it's stupid. Why is it so important to you to know the gender than you can't wait an extra few weeks? Or even wait till 20 weeks? Does it matter that much to you? If I was going to spend money on a test I would want to make sure it was 100% accurate and I would wait until I could get that test. Like pp said you can negotiate an oop rate with the companies now, almost everyone gets the NIPT. My sister in law had her results by 11.5 weeks a few months ago.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think I'd bother to find out two weeks earlier than you find out with the NIPT.

Right?! What's a two week difference, for accurate results that have an actual medical upside too?

So you still didn't actually answer my question so I'm not sure why you even felt the need to comment.

But my practice won't even draw for NIPT until 12 weeks. Then it takes 1-2 weeks to get the results so it's not a 2 week difference.

That’s really backwards.

You need to find a new practice. I did it at 10 weeks and received the results over email within 48 hours.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think I'd bother to find out two weeks earlier than you find out with the NIPT.

Right?! What's a two week difference, for accurate results that have an actual medical upside too?

So you still didn't actually answer my question so I'm not sure why you even felt the need to comment.

But my practice won't even draw for NIPT until 12 weeks. Then it takes 1-2 weeks to get the results so it's not a 2 week difference.

My insurance doesn't cover NIPT either, you can pay a much lower negotiated rate. And not sure why they don't draw till 12 weeks, the standard is 9-10. If you want to do the sneak peak go ahead, but peoples' responses are that a) it isn't accurate and b) will only tell you two weeks earlier. And if you really don't want to do the NIPT and also can't wait till 20 weeks for some reason, you can pay to have an early sonogram at a private place around 14 weeks.

But you haven't taken it so how would you know if it's accurate? And actually I don't think that's the standard because literally nobody I know had it drawn at 9-10 weeks and the earliest was 11. My question was specifically for people to share their experiences with it not a). What they found in google searches or b) their opinions on whether or not I should take the test. I don't understand why you feel the NEED to share your opinion when it has nothing to do with the question asked.

I was actually responding to someone else on this thread. If you don't want a variety of opinions I suggest you stay of DCUM. It's going to be a long road for you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think I'd bother to find out two weeks earlier than you find out with the NIPT.

Right?! What's a two week difference, for accurate results that have an actual medical upside too?

So you still didn't actually answer my question so I'm not sure why you even felt the need to comment.

But my practice won't even draw for NIPT until 12 weeks. Then it takes 1-2 weeks to get the results so it's not a 2 week difference.

My insurance doesn't cover NIPT either, you can pay a much lower negotiated rate. And not sure why they don't draw till 12 weeks, the standard is 9-10. If you want to do the sneak peak go ahead, but peoples' responses are that a) it isn't accurate and b) will only tell you two weeks earlier. And if you really don't want to do the NIPT and also can't wait till 20 weeks for some reason, you can pay to have an early sonogram at a private place around 14 weeks.

But you haven't taken it so how would you know if it's accurate? And actually I don't think that's the standard because literally nobody I know had it drawn at 9-10 weeks and the earliest was 11. My question was specifically for people to share their experiences with it not a). What they found in google searches or b) their opinions on whether or not I should take the test. I don't understand why you feel the NEED to share your opinion when it has nothing to do with the question asked.

Why do you care so much if you're having a boy or a girl that you HAVE to know so early?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think I'd bother to find out two weeks earlier than you find out with the NIPT.

Right?! What's a two week difference, for accurate results that have an actual medical upside too?

So you still didn't actually answer my question so I'm not sure why you even felt the need to comment.

But my practice won't even draw for NIPT until 12 weeks. Then it takes 1-2 weeks to get the results so it's not a 2 week difference.

My insurance doesn't cover NIPT either, you can pay a much lower negotiated rate. And not sure why they don't draw till 12 weeks, the standard is 9-10. If you want to do the sneak peak go ahead, but peoples' responses are that a) it isn't accurate and b) will only tell you two weeks earlier. And if you really don't want to do the NIPT and also can't wait till 20 weeks for some reason, you can pay to have an early sonogram at a private place around 14 weeks.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think I'd bother to find out two weeks earlier than you find out with the NIPT.

Right?! What's a two week difference, for accurate results that have an actual medical upside too?

NP but my insurance didn’t cover NIPT and with both pregnancies I had to wait till 20 weeks.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think I'd bother to find out two weeks earlier than you find out with the NIPT.

Right?! What's a two week difference, for accurate results that have an actual medical upside too?

So you still didn't actually answer my question so I'm not sure why you even felt the need to comment.

But my practice won't even draw for NIPT until 12 weeks. Then it takes 1-2 weeks to get the results so it's not a 2 week difference.

Anonymous wrote:I don't think I'd bother to find out two weeks earlier than you find out with the NIPT.

Right?! What's a two week difference, for accurate results that have an actual medical upside too?

I don't think I'd bother to find out two weeks earlier than you find out with the NIPT.

Anonymous wrote:The folks on BabyCenter do these - the blood draw is likely too early, which means they are often wrong.

If you really want to know, wait until aboiut 10 weeks and request the NIPT so you know it's accurate (even if you're not AMA or otherwise need the test).

The test is tested to be accurate at 8 weeks. Have you taken it? I already saw the babycenter stuff. I'm asking for personal experiences.

The folks on BabyCenter do these - the blood draw is likely too early, which means they are often wrong.

If you really want to know, wait until aboiut 10 weeks and request the NIPT so you know it's accurate (even if you're not AMA or otherwise need the test).

This wasn't available for my last two pregnancies and was thinking about doing it for this one.

The reviews online are weird. There are a ton of positive reviews but it seems the risk of contamination is very much a possibility with boy results.

Curious if anyone has taken this and were your results correct?


I did a search but found very little.