# Ultrasound gender mistake?



## mommieTX (Jul 21, 2006)

How ofter do the techs make mistakes on the gender of the baby? We had a 20 week u/s and we saw no boy parts, but then again, we saw no girl parts either. I looked up some pics on the web and one site said that just because there was an absence of a penis does not automatically mean it is a girl. The pics I saw on the web were clearly girl and clearly boy. It is driving me crazy! We are having another u/s at 25 weeks to check for gender. I have had 2 close friends that were told they were having a girl, but hello BOY!!


----------



## alegna (Jan 14, 2003)

I don't do u/s without medical reason.

-Angela


----------



## Mommy2Jackson (Dec 5, 2005)

With both my boys it's been VERY clear....somoene told me it could be a finger or something, but I highly doubt it LOL.


----------



## emma_goldman (May 18, 2005)

why not wait and be pleasantly surprised? Ultrasound has been deemed dangerous to the fetus.


----------



## NJ*Doula (Apr 14, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *emma_goldman* 
why not wait and be pleasantly surprised? Ultrasound has been deemed dangerous to the fetus.

Oh really? Deemed by whom?. Yes, there's a theory that it's dangerous, but it is far from proven, and plenty of us here still have them for a variety of reasons. I can't help but feel that coming into a thread that asks a specific question (how often techs are wrong about gender) and starting in about ultrasound being dangerous was misplaced and a bit rude. And what's the point of just answering with "I don't do them?" I can't understand what that was supposed to accomplish. The ultrasound debate certainly has it's place on this board, but I don't feel that just any thread about ultrasound should be hijacked to start it.

But, if you have a link to the study that proves that ultrasound damages the fetus somehow, I'd love to see it. But not here.


----------



## operamommy (Nov 9, 2004)

I wouldn't believe it's a girl unless you saw "girl parts." When I was pregnant with my dd it was *very* clear that she was a girl!


----------



## Diva Mama (Jun 6, 2007)

If you really want to know gender, wouldn't it be helpful to push it back a bit further til baby is a bit bigger, or does the increased size make movements, and therefore viewing, more difficult?

My niece was determined to be a boy on the ultrasound. Ha.


----------



## lovingmommyhood (Jul 28, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *emma_goldman* 
why not wait and be pleasantly surprised? Ultrasound has been deemed dangerous to the fetus.

That is very far from the truth.

OP with both of my boys it was very clear that they were boys. There have been many cases of mistaken identity when it comes to U/S. Basically you just have to go into it knowing that they will never be 100% positive about it unless it's a 4D U/S machine.

I never wanted it to be a surprise with either of my pregnancies. That would've driven me nuts! I totally feel for you.


----------



## lovingmommyhood (Jul 28, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *alegna* 
I don't do u/s without medical reason.

-Angela


----------



## mf_colon (Oct 6, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GathererGirl* 
Oh really? Deemed by whom?. Yes, there's a theory that it's dangerous, but it is far from proven, and plenty of us here still have them for a variety of reasons. I can't help but feel that coming into a thread that asks a specific question (how often techs are wrong about gender) and starting in about ultrasound being dangerous was misplaced and a bit rude. And what's the point of just answering with "I don't do them?" I can't understand what that was supposed to accomplish. The ultrasound debate certainly has it's place on this board, but I don't feel that just any thread about ultrasound should be hijacked to start it.

But, if you have a link to the study that proves that ultrasound damages the fetus somehow, I'd love to see it. But not here.











As for the US, if you really want to know I would wait a little longer as the PP suggested. Since it is only five weeks in between, the baby may not have moved much to make a determination clearer. As they get bigger, they tend to shift position and it might make it easier to tell.

And yes many times the predictions are wrong. Nothing is 100%.


----------



## emma_goldman (May 18, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lovingmommyhood*


----------



## emma_goldman (May 18, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GathererGirl* 
Oh really? Deemed by whom?. Yes, there's a theory that it's dangerous, but it is far from proven, and plenty of us here still have them for a variety of reasons. I can't help but feel that coming into a thread that asks a specific question (how often techs are wrong about gender) and starting in about ultrasound being dangerous was misplaced and a bit rude. And what's the point of just answering with "I don't do them?" I can't understand what that was supposed to accomplish. The ultrasound debate certainly has it's place on this board, but I don't feel that just any thread about ultrasound should be hijacked to start it.

But, if you have a link to the study that proves that ultrasound damages the fetus somehow, I'd love to see it. But not here.

not a study, but a Mothering thread


----------



## Inspired007 (Aug 25, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mommieTX* 
How ofter do the techs make mistakes on the gender of the baby? We had a 20 week u/s and we saw no boy parts, but then again, we saw no girl parts either. I looked up some pics on the web and one site said that just because there was an absence of a penis does not automatically mean it is a girl. The pics I saw on the web were clearly girl and clearly boy. It is driving me crazy! We are having another u/s at 25 weeks to check for gender. I have had 2 close friends that were told they were having a girl, but hello BOY!!

Ultrasounds are notorious to being wrong about gender but it also has a lot to do with the experience of the tech performing it. At my 16 week u/s we knew it was a girl b/c we saw the infamous "hamburger" shape between the legs. You are correct that the absence of boy parts doesn't automatically mean it's a girl. It just depends, some boys are easily identifiable at 16-20 wks while other boys take longer to notice.


----------



## Down_to_Earth (Sep 7, 2006)

I've also heard of wrong ultrasounds. If we're having a boy, then he's going to be wearing a lot of pink and purple.







A few months ago, my husband asked the facetious question of what if she's a he? I told him that our son will be wearing a lot of pink. Andy said, half-jokingly, I think that his son was not going to wear pink. I replied with, "Said the dad who is wearing a pink shirt and has three more." He stuck his tongue out at me.







(He was wearing a bright pink, almost hot pink golf shirt and has one or two more and one or two pink button downs that he wears for work.)

From the moment I told him of the positive test, he was saying girl. The day before the u/s I was sitting in church, kinda spacing out. (I went to the contemporary service which is not my favorite, but I wanted to take Communion.) I was watching a couple of parents with a son who didn't quite look two. He was cute and fun to watch. I had had the thought of what if she turns out to be a he? Then I just prayed that we weren't too disappointed and just as happy and eager to greet him. I still think that on occasion.

For now, I am content with a baby, if he's going to be wearing pink and purple and ruffles and lace for awhile. (I do have some gender neutral clothes, too.) We've hardly discussed names, so that helps with a surprise, I think.

Okay. I'm done rambling.


----------



## kehliouise (Aug 4, 2006)

i'm not positive on this but that is probably why in the olden days little boys and little girls all wore dresses. i love old black and white photos of little boys in frilly dresses. we went to the little white house in georgia a while back and there were great pictures of FDR in all sorts of dresses.


----------



## 2tadpoles (Aug 8, 2004)

20 weeks can still be a little early to see well.

I think between 22 and 26 weeks is the best time to look.

Not to be snarky, but I hope that your non-medical ultrasounds are not being paid for by an insurance company. I used to work in an obstetrician's office, and it would really tick me off to see the BS reasons listed for doing a frivolous ultrasound.


----------



## RiverSky (Jun 26, 2005)

When I was pregnant with my daughter, my neighbor was also pregnant. She had 3 ultrasounds and determined that she was having a girl and everyone in her huge family bought her tons of baby girl clothes and pink blankets, etc. Well, she had her baby before me and lucky me, it was a boy! (I got all the girlie stuff, for free!!)

Just buy a few neutral things and go shopping once the baby is born. And enjoy the surprise!! It sounds to me as if your ultrasound was completely inconclusive and I wouldn't take anything from it.


----------



## homeschoolingmama (Jun 15, 2007)

I wonder sometimes too. For our first..we didn't find out. For our second we wanted to know. They outlined her and we knew for sure. For our third..it was obvious it was a boy. For this one they said a girl. She was moving around so much she was having a hard time seeing. She said she is fairly certain it is a girl. We are ready for a girl but have a bit of doubt that it is.


----------



## Codi's Mama (Jun 15, 2006)

One of DH's cousins was told she was having a girl, surprise! she had a boy.


----------



## Pumpkin_Blythe (Jun 19, 2007)

I am on my 3rd child and I have had the correct sex told to me by the tech 3 times. This is the only time I ever really saw what they saw (a penis) I never got what the heck they meant by my girls "taco's" lol


----------



## GooeyRN (Apr 24, 2006)

A friend of mine was told girl, and it turned out to be a boy. She was happy!

I work in a small hospital. Our U/S tech is known for being wrong about the gender. Sometimes its so hard to tell! I wouldn't go out and buy pink or blue based on just one u/s. If you had to have a few u/s's, and they always say the same gender, I would buy clothes but not do any painting/buying quilts/expensive stuff in the appropriate genders.


----------



## OldFashionedGirl (Mar 22, 2004)

I'm not finding out, but I've never been able to make heads or tails out of US pics. Can someone direct me to these pics on the web that show the difference between boy and girl US?


----------



## jmwmommysings (Jul 14, 2007)

Yeah, it just may be too early to tell and the early development looks a lot alike. Don't go too late though, we ended up needing a late ultrasound with our last one (complications that needed to be checked) and it was our only one and the baby was too big to tell because it was so crowded in there! We had to wait until birthday!

Jessica


----------



## k9sarchik (Nov 11, 2006)

Here is a website to take a look at regarding U/S.

There is no proof that U/S is safe, especially multiple exposures.

http://www.icpa4kids.org/research/pr...ultrasound.htm


----------



## michaelasmommy (Aug 2, 2005)

We had 3 U/S before we finally saw "parts". I was sure it was a boy, but my little girl made me wait even longer-she crossed her legs over each other for 2 seperate U/S! Even so, the tech on the 1st one said girl, even though she couldn't get a great look. We did the vaginal U/S, too, and still couldn't get a clear shot-and that was at 22 weeks.

For you flamers-I had so many because dd had fluid around her heart, which thankfully resolved itself later in the pregnancy, so no "flivorous" tests here. I have and will have an U/S with all my babies, because IMO, the benefit of identifying life-threatening problems outweighs the hypothetical risk of U/S. Especially important for my out-of-hospital birth, as the necessary equipment may not be available if there is a problem. DD would have needed immediate treatment if her heart had not resolved-and I think her life is more important than the non-life-threatening unproven risks of any U/S.


----------



## kconterio (Dec 14, 2006)

our little one's position made it really hard to tell the gender for the first two ultrasounds. unfortunately, it also made it really hard to get a good picture of her heart, and so we had to keep going back. third try was our charm though, she was head down and we got great pics of the heart and her girly bits.

i was totally convinced we were having a boy and i still can't quite bring myself to buy too much girly girl stuff.... just in case. but we had a "probably a girl" a "maybe a girl" and another "definitely girl" ultrasounds so I'm guessing we probably have a girl









my mom is a teacher and knows many many kids who were "supposed" to be the other gender. I still don't trust the u/s 100%.

I'm honestly happiest that her heart is perfect and that she was head down! she can still come out a he for all i care! pink looks great on everyone!


----------



## snozzberry (Jul 29, 2005)

I agree! It would do the world some good if more parents were comfortable dressing boys in pink and girls in blue!







It's just a silly delineation, imnsho...


----------



## camille76 (Apr 9, 2005)

All 3 of mine were right. but i think there's always that element of "what if they're wrong!"

Can you post a pic of your sono so we can judge for ourselves!?


----------



## StrawHatBrat (Jan 5, 2005)

I've not found out on ultrasound yet, my first 2 were surprises, my last I found out when the doc accidentally told me while delivering my amnio results. This time I plan to try and find out during our ultrasound. They're *mostly* accurate, but are also wrong sometimes.... so I don't plan on taking tags off things I buy just in case.


----------



## Onemagicmummy (Jul 27, 2007)

i have had 2 correct u/s gender predictions. DD ws a DD and DS2 was DEFFINATLY a DS2. i was uable to find out woth the first cos he crossed his legs and turned his back on us when we had eh scan. Unborn Bump we think is a girl(adn the way i feel with it makes me think its a girl too as i fel tthe same with both boys and i felt this way with DD) and if the scan was wrong and She is a HE well HE will be wearing pink a lot. i do have some boys stuff butnot a lot but wither way im not fussed i jsut wanted to know as i dont handel teh "unknown" well and get anxious so i just wnted a "well it looks like its an 80% chance its X Gender but tehr is always a 20% chance its Y Gender" that is enoght for me to feel better.

Kiz


----------



## AlexisT (May 6, 2007)

By us, they wouldn't tell (local NHS rule). But, sometimes it's clear as day and sometimes clear as mud. It depends on the tech doing the scan and the position of the baby. So if you have another scan, they might be able to tell that time. Inconclusive scans are the way it goes, and it's usually a good thing if the tech is honest and says s/he can't tell.


----------

