IC Coverage

Bedrest Day: 26
Hospital Day: 16

IC (incompetent cervix) made the news earlier this week. Read the article, here.

IC isn't something that's widely addressed, and most women really ahve no idea what it is unless it's effected them personally. I fell into that group before we lost Emerson. I read something about it briefly in one of my baby books and just pushing it to the back of my mind. How could it effect me, right?

Quote from "What to Expect When Your Expecting" on IC:

An incompetent cervix can be the result of a genetic weakness of the cervix; exposure of the mother to DES (diethylstilbestrol) when se was in her mother's womb; extreme stretching of or severe lacerations to the cervix during one or more previous deliveries; a cone biopsy for cervical cancer; or cervical surgery or laser therapy

I've never been a fan of WTE, the book plays out like a hypochondriac's pregnancy Bible, especially for someone like me. It gave me a prepare for the worst mentality whenever I read it, which was not how I wanted to feel. But that's not the point. Really, how could any of that apply to me? There's no history of IC in my family, I wasn't exposed to DES in utero (wrong generation, I was born in 1988 for crying out loud), it was my first pregnancy, and I've never had any kind of procedure done on my cervix before. I should have been in the clear. Yeah, not the case. Most of the time, women don't know they have it until they've suffered a loss. I for one, am going to push the women I know to ask for their cervical measurements when they get ultrasounds, not all doctors put it into their routine care. It is not something they typically screen for, and I really, really think it should be part of your routine care. So many losses could be prevented if they would just check.

It's great to see IC getting some coverage, but on the other hand the article itself makes me want to scream. First it pretty much tells me I'm a defective pregnant woman and therefore a defective woman (and I don't mean anything against/degrading women by this, just that our bodies are designed for this and apparently I've just screwed up the system somehow). And it's just not right to say that a TVC (transvaginal cerclage; either the MacDonald or the Shirodkar which I had placed) is always followed by bedrest. No, no, no! Many women are not placed on bed rest after their cerclage is placed. I wasn't placed on bedrest until I started ahving dramatic cervical changes after it was placed. If I had stayed at a consistent and "good" length, bedrest would not have been needed.

And even on to the actual length. A CL measurement of 2.0 cm would freak most women out. You can have IC and measure above 3.0 cm or above.

And the article wasn't too nice towards TAC (transabdominal cerclages). I don't have any experience with them, just what I've heard through the grapevine on IC forums. I don't even know what to say on the subject anymore. My brain is jumbled to much.

Like I said, it's great to see that it actually made the news. Women really should be educated on what it is, but it would be really great if these people could get their facts straight in the process.