A Loss of Innocence and a Gain in Vulnerability: Subsequent Pregnancy after a Loss

Abstract

Each year in the United

Interconceptional Counseling After Perinatal and Infant Loss

“…Generally speaking, couples who have had pregnancies with poor outcomes are likely to be more fearful and anxious regarding subsequent pregnancies than couples who have not experienced poor outcomes. However, most parents' apprehension regarding future perinatal complications is greater than the actual risk of repetitive experiences (Armstrong & Hutti, 1998;Brost & Kenney, 1992;Cote-Arsenault & Mahlangu, 1999;Wheeler, 2000).…”

“…It is thought that with a subsequent pregnancy, there is decreased attachment during the pregnancy. Whether it affects the subsequent child's life will depend on how well the parents have reintegrated their grief (Armstrong & Hutti, 1998;Cote-Arsenault & Morrison-Beedy, 2001;Peterson, 1994;Robertson & Kavanaugh, 1998;Robinson et al, 1999;Wheeler, 2000).…”

“…Some suggest that the couple wait at least 6 months before conceiving so as not to coincide with the anniversary date of the previous loss/death. Some parents may feel that bearing another child is healing (Cote-Arsenault & Mahlangu, 1999;Menke & McClead, 1990;Wheeler, 2000;Zeanah, 1989). Oglethorpe (1989) claimed that grief work is interrupted by pregnancy and may not be resumed until after the birth of the next baby, and that any child born after a perinatal loss is at risk for becoming a replacement child.…”

“…Interventions would include addressing these concerns and issues with parents prior to the subsequent pregnancy. Wheeler (2000) provides questions to help couples decide their readiness to become pregnant again. These include, "Does the loss still consume my every thought?"…”

Sailing Against the Tide

“…The mothers kept fi nding different kinds of indicators and observations to reassure them of their baby's health (Cote-Arsenault et al, 2006) and give them a sense of control. Wheeler (2000) described mothers seeking frequent prenatal visits and expressing a need for more opportunities to hear their baby's heartbeat or to see the baby on an ultrasound scan. Sinclair, Gardner, Gillen, Boreland, and Hood (2001) reported women who had previous stillbirths had a reliance on the revelatory power of technology to let them see their baby, as evidenced in the following statement: "I just lived from visit to visit…when he put the scan on and I could see the baby moving I was reassured but when I left I was terrified my baby would die."…”