Pregnant and the firing range

[Bill of Rights]

I would see little harm from a .22; certainly far less than the shottie, however with that said, I would certainly agree with the above re: outdoor range, minimal lead exposure (i.e. filter mask and gloves), and if available, I would think a suppressed rifle/pistol would be the way to go.

I might also consider, as odd as it will sound, a blanket or jacket or some other thick item placed on her abdomen to provide some level of hearing protection for the growing one.

If the use of a firearm cannot be made safe for live-fire, there certainly can be no excuse for not doing dry-fire (or airsoft) practice which has the additional benefit of being free.

Of note, I would like to make clear that this is not based on medical knowledge or experience but rather on what seems to make sense. I welcome any thoughts which may document error in this post.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[rvb]

The concusion from the noise is very bad developmentally (not just hearing), as is the lead. I wouldn't even risk a .22. Damage is cumulative and while a .22 may not be "bad," what's 200 .22s? Is the risk of not staying off the range for part of a year worth it?

Once you have the little one, respect that their ears are very sensitive to damage. And most hearing protection does not properly fit young todlers. Leave them at home until they are ready to shoot.

We wash the little one's clothes/rags/towels/etc seperately. This way any lead from shooting and (most importantly) reloading and cleaning brass is less likely to contaminate his clothes. Consider doing seperate laundry loads when pregnant (after shooting).

Since my wife was pregnant and since our son was born, ANYTIME I finish shooting, reloading, or dryfiring I was hands/arms very well. My gun/reloading area is in a seperate area of the house (basement) that the little one seldom ventures. Brass prep is done in the garage, and I sift tumbling media outside if I can.

Here in IN, as part of the typical 1yr-old shots and blood screenings, a lead test is done. We were going to ask for one because of all my reloading and shooting but it's standard anyway. Our son's 1yr checkup was just this week. The results will be good confirmation that our practices are working (or good to know if we need to do more).

-rvb

ps: on Fox news online today:


CHANGQING, China — A mayor apologized to residents of two Chinese villages where more than 600 children were sickened by lead poisoning, saying a nearby smelter targeted by angry protests would not reopen until it meets health standards, state media said Tuesday.

...... Lead poisoning can damage the nervous and reproductive systems and cause high blood pressure, anemia and memory loss. It is especially harmful to young children, pregnant women and fetuses, and that damage is usually irreversible, according to the World Health Organization.

 

[theweakerbrother]

I'm no doctor but you'll probably rarely get sound gun advice from doctors regarding guns. They are usually snobbish and proclaim that guns are the opposite of what they do. Anyone else get the speech about keeping a gun in the home and accidentally shooting a loved one, child, Santa Claus?

Still, if it were my wife asking, I'd ask her to hold off. I would be concerned about hearing loss for the infant.

And don't forget, they do manufacture leadless ammo.

 

[kludge]

Where's antsi when you need him?

 

[Jay]

They are usually snobbish and proclaim that guns are the opposite of what they do. Anyone else get the speech about keeping a gun in the home and accidentally shooting a loved one, child, Santa Claus?

Sounds like time to change doctors to me.... and tell 'em why, as you leave.

 

[antsi]

Here.

you'll probably rarely get sound gun advice from doctors regarding guns.

And even more rarely will you get a sound, evidence-based assessment of relative risks where pregnancy is concerned.

Nobody is going to be able to quantify the risks of fetal exposure to shooting preciesly, because nobody has done or ever will do a randomized controlled trial of fetal exposure to gunfire. Any opinion you get is going to be based on speculation and clinical judgment.

The actual risk of a few range sessions - especially with rimfires and especially at an outdoor range - during pregnancy is probably negligible.

However, most parents don't want to expose their unborn children to risks - even negligible risks - unless there is a strong necessity to do so. If mom has to shoot to defend her life, that's a necessity. Recreational shooting isn't, so nobody is going to recommend it.

It's also important to remember that risk assessment is always based on the individual. You have to weigh the risks of option A against option B for that particular patient. So, for a hypothetical case, let's say we have Mrs A whose estranged husband is deranged and violent and has sworn to murder her. She wants to buy a gun and take Kludge's "Intro to Defensive Pistol" class. For Mrs A, the risks of being unarmed and untrained might well outweigh the risks of exposing the fetus to noise and inhaled lead. Her clinical recommendation would be based on the ALARA principle (As Low As Reasonably Achievable). She could do as much of her training as possible with Airsoft. She could take her training outdoors. She could take private one-on-one lessons to avoid exposure to her classmates' shooting. All this to obtain the benefit (being armed and trained) while limiting the risk as much as possible.

This is admittedly a rare circumstance - most women shooters aren't in Mrs A's situation. For recreational shooting, or even defensive skills maintenance, the cost of laying off shooting for 40 weeks is a minimal price to pay for avoiding an unnecessary fetal exposure to something potentially (even remotely and unlikely) harmful.

 

[Hoosier8]

The concusion from the noise is very bad developmentally (not just hearing), as is the lead. I wouldn't even risk a .22. Damage is cumulative and while a .22 may not be "bad," what's 200 .22s? Is the risk of not staying off the range for part of a year worth it?

What? Can't hear ya!

 

[ProZack]

Pretty good, pretty good.
I'm glad to see some good sound thinking.

I think I'll go post a new, related thread and see how it does

 

[kludge]

Guns bad; too loud; damage hearing of unborn children.

Fireworks are OK.

Question about Fireworks and Baby's developing ears - Pregnancy - BabyCenter

Are Fireworks Too Loud For Baby? - Pregnancy - Families.com

LOL. Fireworks are much louder than 100dB. (and so are guns).

OK here's a quest... should someone here accept the challege.

Items needed.
1. Bucket of water
2. Gun
3. Ammo capable of supersonic flight.
4. Helper
5. Towel (optional)
6. Nose plugs (unless you like the feeling of being waterboarded)

Procedure:
Agree before hand on a "safety sign" to cut off further testing.
You and you helper stand on the firing line.
Set bucket of water on ground.
Hand gun and ammo to helper.
Go soak your head in a bucket.
Helper shoots 5 rounds
Remove head from bucket. Towel off (not required).
Stick fingers in ears. (or use 25-30dB NRR ear plugs)
Helper shoots 5 rounds.
Change roles so there are two data points.
Make notes.
Report back.

My fingers in my ears are roughly equivalent to having plugs. Plugs are good enough to prevent hearing damage. Is a bucket of water (amniotic fluid)?

 

[Scutter01]

Any time someone talks about taking their baby to the range, it reminds me of my dad taking me to the fireworks when I was very young. The noise used to hurt my ears REALLY bad. It would make him mad because he thought it was scaring me. He had no concept of how painful it was for me. Later on, I learned that kids' hearing is MUCH more sensitive than adults, and adults frequently overlook that fact.

Now, when I take my daughter to the range or to anything with extremely loud noise (like fireworks), I make sure she has adequate hearing protection available to her. She may not need it, but I have it for her. With that in mind, I don't think I would let my pregnant wife anywhere near a firing line simply because of the noise.

 

[antsi]

My fingers in my ears are roughly equivalent to having plugs. Plugs are good enough to prevent hearing damage. Is a bucket of water (amniotic fluid)?

Water transmits sound quite well. I remember from ultrasound theory that the acoustic impedance of water is nearly zero. This is one of the reasons that amniotic fluid around the baby improves ultrasound image quality, and the same reason we used to ask pregnant women not to urinate before their ultrasound - the urine in the bladder serves as an "ultrasound window."

One of the things that really interferes with sound transmission, if I remember correctly, is interfaces between materials with very different acoustic impedances. For example, much of the energy is lost between the ultrasound transducer and the patient's skin. This energy loss is reduced when gel is used to bridge the gap.

I'm not sure, therefore, that the water in the bucket is the essential part of your experiment. I think that the composition of the bucket (chosen to reproduce the acoustic properties of maternal skin, adipose, fascia, muscle, and myometrium as closely as possible) would be the important feature. I'm not sure it's really necessary to simulate the media involved, though. The acoustic properties of human tissues are very well known, so the fetal exposure could be calculated - I'm guessing fairly precisely - by an acoustic engineer.

Then we would get back to the problem I noted above - even if we did precisely determine the dB the fetus would be exposed to, nobody really knows the threshold level of noise that is damaging to the fetus.

 

[shooter]

id say no way!

 

[Bisley Man]

I agree

id say no way!

Like the breast feeding while shooting or at the range post, WHY? There will be plenty of time later to sharpen your skills.

 

[kludge]

The acoustic properties of human tissues are very well known, so the fetal exposure could be calculated - I'm guessing fairly precisely - by an acoustic engineer.

Touche.

I wonder do you have access to any data of the acoustic impedance of tissue vs. frequency?

What might be a very low impedance to ultrasound might not be at audio frequencies.

 

[RCB]

Definitely be cautious of the lead. It can do a number of very bad things in small quantities to unborn children. It may not seem like much, which it isn't, but inhaling it is one of the quickest absorption methods you can ask for.

One of my friends had a lot of trouble with her eyesight (almost at the extent of prescribable lenses) that was attributed to lead.

Could be just fine, but I wouldn't want to risk it, nor see a purpose to. Nothing to say you can't keep a firearm handy though

 

[revance]

When my wife was pregnant she gave up many things she loved... especially caffeine (she didn't consume ANY). Her attitude was that it was only 9 months and she never wanted to think "was this my fault" if something went wrong. Our daughter is healthy and smart, but she does have some sensory processing issues.

We are both very happy that we NEVER have to wonder if there was something more we could have done during the pregnancy to prevent it.

My opinion: The stakes are too high, just wait it out.

 

[NEWMAN]

Wow can't believe you would have to ask.

 

[ProZack]

Wow can't believe you would have to ask.

Well... the real reason I HAD to ask was I needed 10 posts to pm on the for sale board and I thought I'd see what folks thought on this issue.

The wife is pregnant and there's nooo way she'd go near the range, good stuff here though!

 

[smitty12b]

These two were at Wilbur Wright a few years back..

I don't think her childs safety is her main concern, notice the pack of reds in her hand..

 

[cce1302]

My wife shot while pregnant with all three of our kids (at different times). No large calibers (.40 S&W was the biggest) and not for long range sessions, or all the time while pregnant. The kids turned out fine.