PREGNANCY: Who I should contact, NEUVOLA or TERVEYSASEMA?

Family life in Finland from kindergartens, child education, language schooling and everyday life. Share information and experiences. Network with other families.
Rip
Posts: 5582
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 12:08 pm

Re: PREGNANCY: Who I should contact, NEUVOLA or TERVEYSASEMA

Post by Rip » Tue Jun 03, 2014 3:26 pm

Upphew wrote:
anna.g wrote:I respect that the Finns have their way of doing things but when it comes to serious health issues (and childbirth is as serious as it gets) that might not be the best way.
Not even close to best. 17. http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablo ... ment-goals
Merely noting than when the metric something like "deaths per 100 000 births" (and the number of live birth in Finland being less than 60 000 annually) even random fluctuations (that by definition have no particular reason) start to show.



Re: PREGNANCY: Who I should contact, NEUVOLA or TERVEYSASEMA

Sponsor:

Finland Forum Ad-O-Matic
 

CH
Posts: 869
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2005 10:13 am
Location: Espoo

Re: PREGNANCY: Who I should contact, NEUVOLA or TERVEYSASEMA

Post by CH » Tue Jun 03, 2014 8:06 pm

anna.g wrote:
CH wrote: Like what exactly would require a blood test to confirm pregnancy/check hcg levels, other than previous miscarriages? If there is a medical reason for it, sure, the tax payers will pick up the tab, but to satisfy one's own curiosity... pay for it yourself. And there is no reason to confirm a pregnancy by a blood test as a standard procedure.
Yet another thread coming down to "I don't want my taxes to pay for [...]".

It generally doesn't bother me but this one is a health topic, so perhaps you can leave your accounting perspective out of it. Besides, Finland has a positive attitude to population increase through childbirth, family protection etc. If you don't want your taxes going towards that, tell your congressman.
Rip already gave you a good answer for this, but I just wanted to add...

No, I do not want my taxes to go to frivolous tests that have absolutely no medical benefits in a normal healthy pregnancy (and pregnancy isn't a disease). I want my taxes to go to pay for good health care, which costs a lot, way more than we can afford, unfortunately. So yes, it's about accounting... where to put the money and where not to squander it.

Liam1
Posts: 288
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2007 10:15 am
Location: Espoo

Re: PREGNANCY: Who I should contact, NEUVOLA or TERVEYSASEMA

Post by Liam1 » Tue Jun 03, 2014 11:31 pm

The key point in this Anna is that it should not be someone having to justify medically why not to do a test, but there needs to be a medical reason to do the test. As I wrote and I think that you may have acknowledged (there were many posts so not sure who youe were answering!), the test doesn't seem to change anything medically. Perhaps useful on women who don't have a clue how preganant they are, but the OP seems to know.

User avatar
misu
Posts: 96
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 11:03 am
Location: Turku

Re: PREGNANCY: Who I should contact, NEUVOLA or TERVEYSASEMA

Post by misu » Thu Jun 05, 2014 1:05 am

I don't really see the point in having pregnancy confirmed with a blood test unless there's some specific reason to. They might check hCG levels when you get the routine maternity blood screenings (rhesus factor, hemoglobin, blood type, maternal serum, etc.), but the + pee strips and barfing that began at 6 weeks was enough confirmation for me. The ultrasound at 5w6d I paid for myself privately mostly to rule out an ectopic pregnancy or blighted ovum (blood test wouldn't tell you that), just as a peace-of-mind thing.

Also, my impression as someone who's currently 28 weeks up the spout is that the system doesn't skimp at all on maternal care. I've had sooo many tests done (ultrasound scans, numerous blood tests, genetic marker screenings, glucose tolerance, etc.) that I feel like an overworked guinea pig, not to mention the Neuvola appointments every 3 freaking weeks. It feels like they roll out the red carpets for pregnant people here so accusing the system of being cheap by not offering a futile blood test routinely is pretty amusing.
Image

macora
Posts: 92
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2014 11:31 pm

Re: PREGNANCY: Who I should contact, NEUVOLA or TERVEYSASEMA

Post by macora » Thu Jun 05, 2014 4:01 am

Rip wrote:Merely noting than when the metric something like "deaths per 100 000 births" (and the number of live birth in Finland being less than 60 000 annually) even random fluctuations (that by definition have no particular reason) start to show.
And without a pretty large chapter about methodology such multi-national studies are pretty close to not worth the paper they are printed on. The WHO likes this style, though.
CH wrote:I want my taxes to go to pay for good health care, which costs a lot, way more than we can afford, unfortunately. So yes, it's about accounting... where to put the money and where not to squander it.
It is also about accounting, for sure. There is a difference between short term saving and long term gains though. Especially so in health care. Investing 100 EUR today can save hundreds of thousands in the coming years. Unfortunately one has to have *some* money to make investments today that pay off only tomorrow. I am not talking about unnecessary tests here.
Image

Rip
Posts: 5582
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 12:08 pm

Re: PREGNANCY: Who I should contact, NEUVOLA or TERVEYSASEMA

Post by Rip » Thu Jun 05, 2014 9:57 am

misu wrote: I've had sooo many tests done (ultrasound scans, numerous blood tests, genetic marker screenings, glucose tolerance, etc.) that I feel like an overworked guinea pig, not to mention the Neuvola appointments every 3 freaking weeks.

I don't know/remember your personal situation but generally speaking there is more visits and some blood tests for first time mothers (probably at least in some cases "first preganacy in this country") than with later pregnancy and then some ultra sound blood test screenings if you're above some age (30 something). Maximum number of tests for you if you fit into both categories - and of course you may get more tests if the initial results are less than optimal (elevated blood sugar levels probably one of the more likely options, presumably some low level of iron gets that scrutinized more actively etc.)

These too are a combination of medical and financial reasoning. If one's first pregnancy went fine, certain kinds of complications are rare also during later pregnancies - and bit grimly if the fetus has the Down syndrome, those worrying about financing of the medical system don't actually ask the mother to have an abortion, but they would not mind if she did that anyway.

CH
Posts: 869
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2005 10:13 am
Location: Espoo

Re: PREGNANCY: Who I should contact, NEUVOLA or TERVEYSASEMA

Post by CH » Thu Jun 05, 2014 5:14 pm

macora wrote:It is also about accounting, for sure. There is a difference between short term saving and long term gains though. Especially so in health care. Investing 100 EUR today can save hundreds of thousands in the coming years. Unfortunately one has to have *some* money to make investments today that pay off only tomorrow. I am not talking about unnecessary tests here.
Yes, definitely! A good example of this is vaccinations. Before a vaccination is taken into the national vaccination program (read: payed for by the taxpayers) the vaccination has to be proven effective and cost beneficial. We do have a pretty extensive vaccination program, but there are still a lot of vaccines that you have to pay for yourself if you want it. Another good example would be the PKU test for newborns that is (as far as I know) a standard test in the US, but not here. The reason for not having it here is that it's way rearer here than elsewhere, but some doctors are now urging to have it included, especially as there are more children of non-native-Finnish origin being born. In my opinion it should have been already included as it is just a blood test and a missed disorder is devastating for the baby, but apparently it hasn't been seen as cost benficial.

Iloveocean
Posts: 33
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: PREGNANCY: Who I should contact, NEUVOLA or TERVEYSASEMA

Post by Iloveocean » Sun Jun 08, 2014 9:55 am

I contacted with NEUVOLA and the nurse replied that I do not need blood test, they trust on the pregnant test which I made at home. She gave me an appointment time this month but the first ultrasound gonna be carried out on WEEK 12. And yes, there gonna be only two ultrasounds during the pregnancy.

One friend of mine who is in 20 WEEK pregnancy, she has just gone through 2nd check up with ultrasound. And she revealed that the gender of the baby was not figured out due to the fact that the baby closed his/her legs so well to hide :). She intends to do ultrasound once more in private clinic, does any know any info about pricing and service in private clinic. Thank you in advance and wait for your responses!

NadjaS
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2020 3:21 am

Re: PREGNANCY: Who I should contact, NEUVOLA or TERVEYSASEMA?

Post by NadjaS » Sat Jan 04, 2020 3:28 am

I feel very sorry for Finns and everyone who has to deal with its medical system! If you don’t have any references, it doesn’t mean the system works nice! Its a miserably considered public system which only cares about saving money and doesn’t care about public health and well-being. There are quite many examples in Europe with similar financial expenses and a completely opposite attitude! I wish finns will question someday all this bullshig they’ve been said all this time and ask why other european countries care...


Post Reply