cream in baby's eyes at delivery...
Watching a baby show tonite and the preemies have all this goop in their eyes that the nurses put on... and i've seen it before... so before I start reading a million articles on what it is and any controversy, have y'all ever heard about parents requesting NO EYE cream for their babies and do you have a decision made?
At the hospital tour last week I remember one mom saying "what if we don't want the cream put on the baby's eyes?" the tour lady said "just tell the nurses pre-delivery and they should honor your request"... and i was like "hmmmm, another thing to research!"
(ok before i hit send i just HAD to look it up: 1st article i came upon, yes, is a pro-homebirth site, but at least it explained the ointment is antibiotic and why babies are given it... guess I have to see what the hubby thinks, too. i'd bet i would've read about this in my books but I just am not there yet!)
https://childbirth.amuchbetterway.com/newborn-baby-eye-drops-explained/
Re: cream in baby's eyes at delivery...
Um, yeah. It's an antibiotic so their fresh new eyes don't get some kind of funky infection from being born.
Why would you consider being against this? (seriously, I'd really like to know)
"I'll gladly take cold sores over eye herpes" -ElieFin
"Unicorn glitter gives me UTIs." -Leila'sMommy
If you are not in a COMPLETELY MONOGAMOUS relationship, you have a possibility of passing on an infection you might not know you have. Also, if you are GBS positive the infection can be passed from you to your baby via their eyes.
All of that said, the antibiotic ointment does blur baby's vision and I requested that my baby not be treated until after I had a chance to breastfeed for the first time. Because I had an unplanned c-section that meant that the ointment was delayed almost two hours so that I could breastfeed when I returned to my room from the OR. By the time I got back to the room and breastfed and baby had a bath (also delayed at my request) and then had the ointment administered DS was tired and slept most of the time that his vision would have been effected by the ointment.
i haven't decided anything just find it interesting... here in nj the drops are required apparently ("This is required by law to protect the baby from an unknown gonorrhea or other infection in the mother's body") but some dr's say if you're POSITIVE you don't have chlamydia or gonorrhea (why the drops started decades ago b/c those diseases lead to infant blindness) they advocate skipping the shot... and b/c some say any germs in a hospital (why some want to get the drops I'd imagine) are often rx-resistant anyway. i have heard they let you delay the drops, yes, and some places i guess let you sign a waiver of refusal. hmmmmmmmmmm. just another thing i hadn't even thought about!
Woah... the Vitamin K shot is to prevent clotting. What's your reasoning behind that?
"I'll gladly take cold sores over eye herpes" -ElieFin
"Unicorn glitter gives me UTIs." -Leila'sMommy
This.. It's super important. It only looks all thick for the first few minutes anyways.
I didn't refuse the Vitamin K, but I'm going to answer anyway.
You will find that there are A LOT of mothers/fathers who do not advocate shooting their child full of foreign substances moments after birth (some choose to forgo Vitamin K, Hep B and antibiotic ointment all together at birth, some do Vitamin K orally instead of the shot, some just delay the Hep B, there are a million options). It's not that uncommon for people to want their child messed with as little as possible, and it is not a bad thing in any way. Every set of parents has to do their own research and make their own informed decisions regarding their child's care (and that doesn't stop with the moments after birth, staying informed and advocating for your child is a life long commitment, it comes with being a parent).
The antibiotic ointment is ONLY super important if you have an infection (this includes GBS which you won't be tested for until 36 weeks or so), otherwise, it really looses a lot of importance. I think we will probably refuse it this time even though we just delayed it last time, unless our GBS comes back positive this time, then we will not even delay.
well put...i forgot to put that in: it's all about being informed and making whatever choices you think are correct for your family. (just google Vitamin K shot and controversy or whatever and you'll read why some parents are against it, too.)
Vitamin K isn't a foreign substance. It's found in food. The shot is just a concentrated dose of it in order to prevent deficiency-induced bleeding. On top of that, it's only between 0.5 to 1.0 mg that's given to newborns.
I agree with doing your own research, but the fact that there's really no proven harm in helping your baby not bleed out is kind of a big reason for going ahead with the shot. IMO.
"I'll gladly take cold sores over eye herpes" -ElieFin
"Unicorn glitter gives me UTIs." -Leila'sMommy
You are right, Vitamin K is not an unnatural substance, but the rest of the ingredients found in the Vitamin K shot ARE.
okay... so there's a fatty acid derivative. Fatty acids help move oxygen through the blood and aid in cell development. Dextrose is a sugar, presumably to help metabolize the vitamin through the blood/muscles. Water, obviously
. And a the benzyl alcohol used as a preservative is also produced naturally in various plants and herbs.
I'm not gonna worry about the Australian version that's on the site you posted, since I'm in the US. I'll worry about what the US FDA is okay with.
"I'll gladly take cold sores over eye herpes" -ElieFin
"Unicorn glitter gives me UTIs." -Leila'sMommy
Like I said, I didn't refuse the Vitamin K shot, and I am still torn on what to do with baby #2 (I'm hoping I can get the oral alternative at my hospital but don't have a solid answer yet), HOWEVER, it is important that EACH set of parents do their own research and make their own decisions about the health of their children and the procedures they undergo. If you make an informed decision, weigh the pros and cons, know what is going on with your child, I don't care what decision you make, there are valid arguments on every side.
I agree. And I'm not fighting. Just rebutting your points. Hopefully we'll help other people make a decision.
"I'll gladly take cold sores over eye herpes" -ElieFin
"Unicorn glitter gives me UTIs." -Leila'sMommy
I'm not fighting either, just wanting to highlight how important it is to be knowledgeable about what is going to happen to your baby and to make sure that you are making the right decisions for you! There is so much to learn and know and weigh...it can be overwhelming but it is so important.
Actually, Vitamin K is for the opposite purpose - it is to prevent an uncommon bleeding into the brain in the weeks after birth.
I will be refusing the antibiotic eye ointment, as I believe very strongly that antibiotics are WAY overused, and should never be used as a preventative measure unless there is an extremely high risk of infection, and that infection will be quite serious. If my GBS test comes back positive, then I will get it, but otherwise, no way. I've spoken to several doctors about this, including a few who strongly recommend every baby get the ointment, and they've all told me that as long as I monitor the baby's eyes closely for the first few weeks after birth, the risk of blindness, even if she does get an infection, is extremely low. I just need to take her to the pedi if I notice anything strange, and they should be able to prevent any serious long term effects. Babies that go blind from infections contracted at birth (almost) always have noticeable symptoms well before damage occurs, their parents just didn't know what to look for, or that they should be monitoring their eyes.
As for the vitamin K treatment, I'll be getting the oral dose. It makes me nervous to have her take it, and it makes me nervous to not have her take it. It seems to me that if all newborns have a vitamin K "deficiency" and there's not very much in breast milk, there's a reason for that. Possibly an extremely important reason, and we just don't know what it is yet. However, since there's no empirical proof that it's harmful, and there is proof that it prevents something horrible from happening, I will be somewhat regretfully administering it to my child.
All that being said, don't take my word for any of this! A lot of it is just my opinion, and what I've heard from several doctors whose opinions and knowledge I trust. I would never judge anyone who decides differently than me on these issues, this is one of the times that no matter what you choose, you're making a decision that you think is best for your child. However, I do think everyone should research the hell out of this and make their own decision, instead of blindly following the medical establishment.
For all of those that don't want it... you know that a number of states require it, right? Like it's illegal for the hospital to not administer it, so you don't really have a choice? I agree that antibacterial ointments and antibiotics are overused, but this is not one of those cases in my opinion. If you're concerned about overuse, there are far more common things going on that greatly influence resistance and are usually unnecessary (like using antibacterial soap for every wash or hand gel throughout the day). In my opinion, a little eye goop in the baby's eyes is a good example of a necessary precaution, and not an overuse. If your argument against the overuse of these things involves us needing to form our own immunities and resistance, don't forget that a newborn doesn't have the ability to do that like an adult or older child. That's why very young children are so susceptible to the more devastating effects of otherwise common and innocuous diseases.
1 out of every 4 people has an STD, and many don't even know it. Many STDs can't even be tested for without a breakout, and they may lie dormant for years, so you may have contracted one during, say, your teenage years and be 30 and not even know you have one, despite all of the testing your OB/GYN may have done. As someone else said, there are other things that may be transmitted as well and are not STDs. Would you try to refuse the the antibiotics for group B strep treatment because it might kill your child? Or is that overuse and contributing to bacterial/viral resistance also? In my opinion, the use of antibiotics and antibacterial agents during and immediately after birth is not overuse because that baby does not have the same resistance and immunities that we do. If you're concerned about overuse, you will have plenty of opportunities later on in that child's life to refuse things like antibacterial hand wipes. There are far more effective ways to live this argument after your child has some built-in resistance.
I will not be refusing eye ointment or vit K. shot (hep. B is a non-issue for us, because it's not given until Grade 6 here).
After watching my second baby, Natalie, undergo tons of tests/procedures (spinal tap, IV's, medications, CT Scans, Head Ultrasounds, MRI, etc.) all to discover the cause of her seizures (brain bleed), I no longer worry too much about things like Vit. K. shots and eye ointments. I had questioned the procedures during my first two pregnancies, but ended up not opting out. I think the NICU experience greatly enhanced my respect for the overall medical community and their expertise. I don't necessarily follow blindly, but I also can't find enough reason for us to skip these procedures. This is just my experience and thoughtline - it's early here and my thoughtline is pretty vague:)
I know it was required by law in MIchigan, I'm not sure about Illinois...you might want to double check with your dr about refusing it or not.
And I second what everyone said about doing research, being an informed patient - not everyone's decisions about birth and raising their kids is going to be the same. And not all routine hospital policies are neccesary in 100% of cases (for mothers or babies).
DS2 - Oct 2010 (my VBAC baby!)
Actually your baby can go almost blind for almost a week after that ointment is used.... My husband was recently at a lecture by two MDs at his school about this stuff. One of the MDs tried it in his own eyes to see what would happen. He said it was the most horrible burning pain and he then went practically blind for a week... It was orginally used for gnorrhea but now has become so standard they use it even when the mother is perfectly healthy. I don't have gnorrhea and will be refusing it! Especially after seeing my cousins baby born last October.. his skin all around his eyes blistered/scabbed up and bled from the horrible stuff! Apparently, it is pretty common you just don't hear about it... No thank you!
I am a doctor, so I thought I'd weigh in on this discussion with some medical info:
The eye ointment used is usually Erythromycin. It is safe and not thought to pose a significant risk of chemical conjunctivitis. They used to use silver nitrate which was much more irritating to the eye, though more effective; maybe this is what the above poster is referring to? The ointment is administered to decrease risk of gonococcal ophthalmia, which can cause blindness. You do not know that you don't have gonorrhea unless you have recently had a negative cervical swab. Most infections are carried asymptomatically in the mother, so this is why the ointment is routinely administered. I live in Canada, and here in the province of Ontario it is a Public Health mandated practice; i.e. mandatory.
Vitamin K is not given to prevent clotting; it is actually given to prevent BLEEDING; or more specifically, to prevent hemorrhagic disease of the newborn. The reason it is given as an intramuscular injection is that a single dose of injection Vitamin K is more effective at preventing bleeding than dosing with oral Vitamin K. It is also more effective at preventing late onset hemorrhagic disease, which can present between 2 weeks - 2 months of age. The fact is that Vitamin K deficiency is COMMON in newborns, so this is an issue that should be seriously considered before rejecting the injection at birth.
i cannot remember what we did for DD - I know we refused Hep B shot and said yes to VitK. I think we ended up with the eye ointment, but only after a few hours. I don't have any pictures with her with it, so I can't remember. But I remember debating it and leaning towards no.
We most likely will not allow the eye ointment or the Hep B shot, but will allow the VitK this time around.
Why'd you bump a FOUR YEAR OLD thread?
I also know it is the same ointment/antibiotic they use for blocked duct infections
_____________________________
And I bet the doctor who told her is her incorrect OB