I have a 3 week (hopefully) pregnant bitch and I am debating whether to have her scanned.  She doesnt like the vets and to be honest I have never seen the point but just wondering what everyone else thinks.

It doesnt have to be done at the vets. There are a lot of mobile scanners now, which many people swear are much more acurate.

Am interested in peoples replies and the pro's/con's as have never done it myself before either.

To be honest I'd just wait and see....a scan isn't going to affect the outcome and if she doesn't like the vets why stress her out
Archer

There are mobile scanners accross the country that will scan in your home, that would be less stressful. In my opinion I would rather know one way or the other.

where would i find a mobile scanner in my area [kent].

not sure of kent area. ask it as a topic and you will be more likely to get a response that way.

I personally no longer bother with scans because I think their accuracy is suspect.  I have never had a bitch whelp the same number of puppies that were seen on the earlier scan, probably because of re-absorption.  I guess these days my philosophy is 'what will be - will be'.

If your bitch doesn't like the vets, then it is more likely to cause her to reabsorb through stress.  I would leave well alone. 

You only have to wait another couple of weeks and it will be obvious whether your bitch is in whelp or not. 

Personally I have nev er seen the need for having scans done, by the time that any extra food needs to be given a bitch will be showing obvious signs of being in whelp. 

Could anyone enlighten me as to why they feel it is necessary?  What has gone wrong with being patient?  I can sort of understand the need if a bitch has had previous problems with getting in whelp, but even then my feelings are the less stress the better.  I can also understand someone having a scan done after 6 weeks if there are doubts as to pregnancy or not, but for the life of me I cannot see the need for early scans!!!

Maybe its my age, but I'm of the old school and believe that whatever will be, will be.

As you know my bitch lost a litter back in the summer, scanned at 5 weeks saw a live healthy litter of 7+ pups, 2 weeks later had her scanned again and all the pups had died.  Had I not had her scanned routinely then the dead pups could have turned nasty inside and I could have lost my girl too..........I think that is a good enough reason to scan.   She has never had problems during pregnancy in the past, so really I didn't need to have her scanned, it was purely for peace of mind!

People are scanned for the same reasons, just to check everything is ok, before it's too late.

So when you knew all the whelps had died, what did you do? What would you have done if some were still living?

When we knew the pups were ALL dead, she was given oxytocin and labour induced, she delivered all the dead babies.  Had there still been live pups, my vet was going to put her on a course of anti-biotics to keep infection down until she had delivered the live pups at term, which was only 12 days away.  But sadly this wasn't the case, labour was induced, then very strong anti-biotics given

I can see where you are coming from, but you would most certainly have seen some symptoms in the bitch with or without the scan.

In over 25 years of breeding, not so often admittedly in the first few years, I have never had a bitch lose puppies in utero at that late stage.  So in my opinion, yes it probably did warn you earlier than you would have known, but on balance the stress on a bitch who doesn't like visiting the vet, plus the risk of infection at the vets, far outweighs your one occasion.

The only time I have known a bitch lose puppies two weeks early, was a friend of mine who's bitch started to discharge brown muck, she rang me I said vet asap, which she did.  the bitch was losing the puppies, but with antibiotics she came through with no lasting infection.

Because the cervix is opening and soft at that stage of pregnancy you would almost certainly have seen discharge which would have set off alarm bells. 

I suppose what I am trying to say is that how do you know for certain that the scan two weeks previously did not have something to do with the puppies dying in utero.  Please do not take that as my saying you are to blame, but I have deep reservations about what a scan can cause in some bitches.

I'm with Sharon on this one. I had Emma scanned, the scan showed pups in process of being mumified and the beginings of a pyo. She showed no signs of being ill, but vet said that scan saved her life, another couple of days and I would have lost Emma.

No, there had been problems right from the start with the pregnancy anyway, so I'm 100% convinced the scan had nothing to do with it.  My girl didn't ovulate until day 21, then continued to bleed right the way through right up to 7 weeks (when the litter died)  then stopped, but I thought this was a good sign, not a bad sign.

She had no symptoms what so ever, no discharge.....because the bleeding had stopped at this stage, she wasn't showing any signs of being ill, so nothing to tell me things had gone wrong.  When my vet looked at the dead pups after she had delivered, she said they had died around 5.1/2 weeks, they were small, black and mummified.  But there was no outward signs that things had gone wrong and because of the scan at 7 weeks, we caught it before a major infection set in, a blood test confirmed that there was an infection just brewing, which the anti-biotics stopped.  Had I waited even a couple more days, then the infection would have been far worse and I dread to think what would have happened to my girl.

Well with bleeding right through like that then you were completely right to have a scan. I would have probably been scanning myself in that instance.

I meant in a perfectly normal straightforward pregnancy.

I can also see that it helped in your case too Kayc, but what springs to mind is, just when do you scan?  As puppies could die at any time in the gestation period.  To cover all eventualities then surely you would need to scan every week, to check that things were OK.

Was there a reason that you scanned when you did?

I think whether to scan or not is basically down to personal preference but in my opinion it causes no harm. Why would pregnant women  be scanned as a matter of routine if there was any risk??  I think in some cases it is necessary to confirm pregnancy, check for any problems and it certainly provides a useful tool if it indicates a singleton puppy.....

I am not saying that the scan itself does any harm chapel rose, but that in a bitch that is nervous about a trip to the vet, as the original posters seems to be it is not a good idea to stress her out.

Or the fact that I try to keep my pregnant bitch's away from infection as much as possible, an unecessary trip to the vet, with all the bugs and germs that are likely to be about, is not in the bitch or puppies best interest.

I have to say in the 30 years of my parents having dogs and in the years that I have I have only ever had one scanned, never again.  As others have said if there were any problems you would see it.  I've heard so many things and I'd rather let nature take it's course.  I feel that people mess around too much these days, I've also never checked the temperature of my dogs I've always known when they've been starting.  This is just my feeling and of course people have their different ways of doing things.

In my case and Kayc, neither of our girls were showing any signs of problems, so if we had both left it to 'nature' we could of both ended up with dead bitches..........so I feel scans are important, luckily all my dogs are fine at the vets, don't stress out so I don't have that worry.  Sometimes the signs of problems aren't visible on the outside until it's too late!

Thanks for all the views.  My vets excuse for trying to get me to have it done this time was that in case she had a small litter ie one or two pups she might have trouble passing them. I thought 3 weeks was still too early for her to be showing but she said as she is normally a very lean dalmatian she would be showing by now.

My dals have never started showing till the fifth or sixth week - for a small litter (4 or 5 pups) not till even later.
:)

I have very racy dogs too (i.e. Border Terriers) and I cannot usually see any difference in their shape until at least 4-5 weeks. By 6 weeks, even with a small litter there change of shape is unmistakeable.

What you can see at about 3-4 weeks is a change in the shape and colour of the nipples, particularly the top ones nearest to the front legs.  Very often all the nipples at 3-4 weeks have a definite noticeable ring around them.

Being in a numercially small breed I like to scan, so that if it proves negative I can let people on my waiting list know in plenty of time to get them on someone elses list.  Archer can probably tell you that she appreciated list, as but for fate having my bitch miss her first Elkhound would have been one of mine, and if I had not scanned she may have missed out on having her oldest.

Thanks Jeangenie I was begining to think I was missing something.  My old girl showed quite early with her last litter but in all fairness it was her third and like me all he bits had gone south but my current girl is having her first litter and is only 3 so if very tight.  I really should keep a diary but the only thing I ever seem to remember about puppies is they make you very tired and I always vow it will be my last litter!!!

Hi LD, I scanned Emma because I have been through this before, though not with Emma. This was Emmas third litter but the stud was unproven, his 1st time. So to a certain extent it really was a case of scanning just to 'see if'.  Emma is a heavy barrel chested Labrador and carries high in the ribcage, and shows no signs of pregnancy until 'the drop' a few days before whelping. No change in character, feeding, nipples, or anything. There were no signs of the 1st litter until 3 days before the birth. Also, for a Labrador she produces small litters, but the pups have a tendency to be rather on the large side at birth, So scanning is a precautionary thing rather than seeing 'how many'

I can then see a very valid reason for having her scanned Kayc and I am sure you are very glad you did.

I think that is my argument, I too would scan for precautionary reasons, but not as a general rule.