Postponing cutting the cord until it stops pulsing?

luvmybaby28 · June 2010

I read this on here yesterday and I was curious about what this means. Is it somehow better for the baby?

cswatch · June 2010

I've heard of this, I think some people think it could be painful for the baby or that the cord has a soul or something... I don't know, my doctor said it's not necessary.

silverflowers · June 2010

I just recently heard this too. I need to do the research, but the rumor is that the longer you leave the cord attached, the more "fresh oxygen" the baby gets once it starts breathing. I've been told studies found it contributes to a numerous amount of benefits like improved memory, eyesight, immunity, etc.

MrsBalletStar05 · June 2010

cswatch:
I've heard of this, I think some people think it could be painful for the baby or that the cord has a soul or something... I don't know, my doctor said it's not necessary.

lol. i have no info on this topic, but that made me laugh :-P

susie985 · June 2010

I think I read that after you give birth, there are still vitamins and nutrients passing through the cord to the baby and that is what the pulsating is.

mcadams1 · June 2010

Holy crap! I've never heard that someone thought it had a soul! That's derranged. My understanding was that they just wanted to get the extra blood to the baby. But my OB also said it wasn't necessary. He gave me a really logical medical reason that I can't recall at this point, of course!

PMJacobsen · June 2010

susie985:
I think I read that after you give birth, there are still vitamins and nutrients passing through the cord to the baby and that is what the pulsating is.

yepp. it gives them the most iron and nutrient rich blood. but you can't bank your cord blood if you do it.

secretmemories13 · June 2010

susie985:
I think I read that after you give birth, there are still vitamins and nutrients passing through the cord to the baby and that is what the pulsating is.

This is exactly right according to our baby classes.... Its mainly done in 3rd world countries where there is no medical care.... It just has extra immunities but doesnt really serve a purpose here with medical care. If I remember correctly it can have adverse affects.... but I could be wrong... its been awhile since my classes...

lauraken · June 2010

We just talked about this in my childbirth class Wednesday. The instructor said if there is no medical reason to cut it right away, to wait about 2 min. before cutting the cord cause of the White or Red blood cells that are flowing to your baby. I'm asking my doc. to wait if possible.

EmmaRain · June 2010

lauraken:
The instructor said if there is no medical reason to cut it right away, to wait about 2 min. before cutting the cord cause of the White or Red blood cells that are flowing to your baby.

Maybe I'm ignorant about this, but I don't understand this. Hasn't the baby been getting these same cells the entire pregnancy? Same with the vitamins. What is the benefit of an extra minute or two?

Skruffy · June 2010

I'm not sure if my baby would benefit from an extra minute of french fries and big macs.

CoastieWife08 · June 2010

Delayed cord cutting allows all of the nutrient-rich blood cells to transfer to the baby.

It's really divided as to whether or not it is beneficial for the baby.

Our feeling, after doing a lot of research, is that it is beneficial, even if it's in the smallest way. Other mammals do not chew away the cord immediately after birth. The blood that is in the cord is meant to go into the baby at birth, not sit in a bank for possible use 30 years later. If that cord blood is so valuable, why wouldn't I want my baby to have it, especially when nature designed him to have it and not someone else?

There are also studies that say it can help prevent anemia in babies. There are several published medical studies that show this, I think one was at Florida or Florida State, I can't remember which anymore.

Just_Jenn · June 2010

Until your baby starts breathing on his own, he is still getting oxygen and other nutrients via the umbilical cord. It is actually possible for a baby to be born and actually not start breathing for a couple of minutes, as they are getting all the oxygen they need through the cord as they have done for months.

The cord pulses as the blood circulates through the baby's system, out to the placenta and back in again. When the baby starts breathing on his own, the cord will slowly stop pulsing, as your body realizes that the placenta and cord are no longer needed, now that the baby is breathing by himself.

The idea of not clamping or cutting the cord until it stops pulsing is to ensure that he's already breathing, so there's no shortage of oxygen, AND also because, if blood is still circulating out of the baby's body and back to the placenta, by clamping too soon, you could actually rob your baby of a large quantity of his blood. By clamping too soon, you also increase the chances that your baby will have jaundice or other issues in his first days of life.

So yes, it's better for the baby, and no, it's not some outdated practice only done in 3rd world countries or because of some loony belief that the cord has a soul...

Bride2bMO · June 2010

DH recently sent me this link.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/05/100524111728.htm

I'm torn. I really liked donating the cord blood the last time. But if there's good stuff to be had, I'd selfishly rather my own kiddo get it.

HBaylies · June 2010

Continuing the let the cord pulse give more iron to the newborn. I've read in a few sources that it may help a little one build stronger immunities. I figure that there's no harm in waiting that short amount of time and plan on doing it myself.

vegandy · June 2010

cswatch:
I've heard of this, I think some people think it could be painful for the baby or that the cord has a soul or something... I don't know, my doctor said it's not necessary.

lol, is this a joke?

kayteatrudeau · June 2010

If it was me (because I posted my birth plan) it's strictly for the benefit of the baby as it has a high number of red blood cells; it is iron rich and contains maternal antibodies.

canamama · June 2010

Skruffy:
I'm not sure if my baby would benefit from an extra minute of french fries and big macs.

lol good point!

lulu?bean · June 2010

Here's an article about it

https://www.inhabitots.com/2010/05/26/waiting-to-clamp-the-umbilical-cord-at-birth-shown-to-be-beneficial-for-baby/

an excerpt:

"Babies receive beneficial stem cells have many therapeutic properties vs. when you clamp the cord and shut off that flow of stem cells.
Researchers note that ?In pre-term infants, delaying clamping the cord for at least 30 seconds reduced incidences of intraventricular hemorrhage, late on-set sepsis, anemia, and decreased the need for blood transfusions.?
Receiving cord blood may also reduce a baby?s risk of other illnesses, including respiratory distress, chronic lung disease and eye disease.
Delayed cord clamping also ensures that a baby receives important clotting factors."

I will probably talk to my OB about it. Considering there doesn't seem to be any beneficial reason to cut it early, waiting a minute or two to cut it (regardless of how solid these findings are) certainly doesn't sound like it could hurt.

BlueRidgeMama · June 2010

Just_Jenn:
Until your baby starts breathing on his own, he is still getting oxygen and other nutrients via the umbilical cord. It is actually possible for a baby to be born and actually not start breathing for a couple of minutes, as they are getting all the oxygen they need through the cord as they have done for months.
The cord pulses as the blood circulates through the baby's system, out to the placenta and back in again. When the baby starts breathing on his own, the cord will slowly stop pulsing, as your body realizes that the placenta and cord are no longer needed, now that the baby is breathing by himself.
The idea of not clamping or cutting the cord until it stops pulsing is to ensure that he's already breathing, so there's no shortage of oxygen, AND also because, if blood is still circulating out of the baby's body and back to the placenta, by clamping too soon, you could actually rob your baby of a large quantity of his blood. By clamping too soon, you also increase the chances that your baby will have jaundice or other issues in his first days of life.
So yes, it's better for the baby, and no, it's not some outdated practice only done in 3rd world countries or because of some loony belief that the cord has a soul...

This.

Also, there is no risk involved, so why not do it? It's only a minute or two, and it is proven to boost baby's iron levels if nothing else. Doctors who discourage it are just anxious to move on IMO. It's just two more minutes before they get out of there.

anna2006 · June 2010

The reason it is not standard medical practice is because there ARE risks. Geez, do people think doctors are too lazy to wait the extra minute because they need to make their Wednesday afternoon tee time?

The risk is polycythemia, which is an abnormally high red blood cell count. If the baby is well perfused to begin with and has a normal hematocrit, allowing the cord blood to drain into the baby on top of that can cause the hematocrit to be abnormally high. What is the risk of that? Well, high hematocrit means that the blood becomes thick and viscous, clogging small capillaries. The clinical manifestations of this are decreased oxygenation and perfusion, jaundice, hypoglycemia and secondary seizures, poor feeding and gut motility problems. The treatment is to give large amounts of IV fluids to try to thin the blood, and in bad cases, to do a partial blood volume exchange, where a percentage of blood is drained from the baby and and equal volume of normal saline is perfused in to replace it. It is not a benign procedure.

Current medical evidence shows that the extra blood from the cord has benefits that outweigh the risks for premature infants, who almost always have lower blood counts to begin with because they haven't started to produce as many blood cells as full term infants. For them, the extra blood infusion is unlikely to push their blood counts dangerously high. But for full term infants, it isn't clear from scientific evidence (not the anecdotal stuff you find on the internet) that the benefit outweighs the risks, so at this time most doctors are not doing it for full term infants.

themrs830 · June 2010

I read that there may be small benefits to letting it stop pulsing before cutting, but just be prepared because you may not have a choice.

My DD wasn't responding well to the last couple pushes and when she finally came out she was a little blue and didn't cry right away. The cord needed to be cut ASAP and she was given oxygen after she was suctioned out. So we couldn't wait- but I was completely ok with that!

Want a personalized experience?

Postponing cutting the cord until it stops pulsing?

Re: Postponing cutting the cord until it stops pulsing?

Choose Another Board

Search Boards