I have had an IV before for a surgery in the past. My arm might as well be paralyzed when it is in place. It is the mental discomfort more than physical. Just knowing it's there makes me queasy, to the point of them worrying I was going to pass out. I don't feel like I'm going to be able to relax and focus on getting through the contractions that way. Just praying that I come back clear of gbs so I don't have to worry about it!
I am the same way with needles HOWEVER I would never put a petty fear of mine ahead of the health of my children. How did you manage through your pregnancy? I mean bloodwork and knowing a baby will push through your vagina or a section was coming?
Where did I say my fear was being put ahead of the health of my baby? Like the PP you must have done a pick and choose at what you read out of my responses. 30 seconds of bloodwork is not the same as dragging an IV around in my arm for hours on end. I have been fully aware that I will push a baby out of my vagina at the end of all this. I'm not really sure how that is remotely related to a fear of needles/tubes coming out of my arm. Nice try though.
Hey everyone- I never said that I wasn't going to get the antibiotics; I actually said I was leaning toward getting them. I just believe in researching my options and being an informed patient. Just because I am questioning something doesn't make me a horrible mother, as many of you seem to be insinuating. I am aware of the possibility of what can happen if the baby contracts GBS from me, and I am already freaked out enough that something I have could harm my child. I am just trying to make sure that this is in fact the best decision- I have spent hours reading about it, and just thought it would be interesting to hear other people's point of view. Just because I am not a doctor myself doesn't mean I am not capable of researching a concern so I can bring it to my doctor's attention and then be able to ask intelligent, thought-provoking questions. (Which is what I said in my post- that I wanted to bring info to my doctor- obviously I am trying to find real info, not just "sham articles on the internet"). I just want to know more than my doctor's printout and 1 minute conversation with me provided last week. Is it so horrible to question why medical procedures are being performed on you and your baby, to want to honestly understand everything that is going on? I also never said anything about getting or declining an IV catheter (I actually have no problem with that at all and would have one no matter if I was getting IV antibiotics or not). Nobody has actually discussed any of my concerns from the original post yet, either. And those actually are legitimate thoughts- I am not making this stuff up, people. Antibiotic resistance is a huge concern, and it doesn't seem as though doctors yet completely understand how birth sets a baby's microbiome for life. So I am just wondering where getting antibiotics the second you are born fits in to this debate.
The majority of the posters here seem to be more concerned with who has the best "zinger" than thought provoking conversation. For what it's worth I understand where you were coming from...
I have had an IV before for a surgery in the past. My arm might as well be paralyzed when it is in place. It is the mental discomfort more than physical. Just knowing it's there makes me queasy, to the point of them worrying I was going to pass out. I don't feel like I'm going to be able to relax and focus on getting through the contractions that way. Just praying that I come back clear of gbs so I don't have to worry about it!
I am the same way with needles HOWEVER I would never put a petty fear of mine ahead of the health of my children. How did you manage through your pregnancy? I mean bloodwork and knowing a baby will push through your vagina or a section was coming?
Where did I say my fear was being put ahead of the health of my baby? Like the PP you must have done a pick and choose at what you read out of my responses. 30 seconds of bloodwork is not the same as dragging an IV around in my arm for hours on end. I have been fully aware that I will push a baby out of my vagina at the end of all this. I'm not really sure how that is remotely related to a fear of needles/tubes coming out of my arm. Nice try though.
Lady you are a brute. I really wish your child good luck and hopefully a safe and healthy life.
I tested positive with my first for gbs and had antibiotics in labour, I wouldn't take that chance of not having them. I have a healthy 4 year old now! 38 weeks this week and getting tested Wednesday after having to ASK AND ASK my midwife. They do not routinely test for gbs in the uk (scotland) even if you have tested positive for it previously! I'm worried sick about gbs and it can be dangerous for newborns. I would lean towards getting the antibiotics! They made me sick as a dog during labour but I would take that every time over risking something happen to her if I hadn't taken them. Hoping to be negative this time time will tell! Do you guys get routinely tested for gbs? I didn't without a fight and also don't get hooked up to iv either! Worrying
@laurawoz I am also trying to research this subject and make an informed, non fear based decision. I'm getting my GBS test next week.
Here is some information I found. The Cochrane Database is a place you can go to find a summary of studies performed on various subjects by non-biased medical researchers who look at hundreds of studies and come to a conclusion.
The Cochrane Collaboration Announces that
Intrapartum Antibiotics for GBS is not evidence based.
"There is lack of evidence from well designed and conducted trials to recommend IAP to reduce neonatal EOGBSD." Translated: There is lack of evidence from well designed and conducted trials to recommend Intrapartum Antibiotics Prophylaxis to reduce neonatal Early-Onset Group B Strep Disease.
It's well known that the percentage of babies who actually benefit from intrapartum antibiotics is very small. And, increasingly, the routine use of chemoprophylaxis (antibiotics) during labor is causing problems with resistant GBS or resistant e. coli.
So, in this area, some OBs and pediatricians have a new approach; for cases of prolonged rupture of membranes, they're only giving antibiotics if the mom runs a fever. Otherwise, they just do a simple blood test on the baby (can be done from cord blood or a heelstick if they miss the cord blood opportunity) to check for C-reactive protein. This is an indicator of an acute infection. If it's negative, everyone can be reassured that baby's fine, even though mom didn't get antibiotics; if it's positive (for whatever reason!), then baby will be appropriately treated for an acute infection. This has great potential for focusing the treatment where it is most needed and not exposing all the others to unnecessary side effects and increased risks from resistant bacteria.
Seriously? The possibility of your child having meningitis or sepsis isn't enough to make you want to get treated for gbs? Good Lord. What's going on in your head?
But still would they give the antibiotics if there was any harm ?? No so what is the issue ... If something is unsafe they don't even bother .... Hell I can't get anything more than paracetamol for cramps
Why are y'all fighting with her? For her to even consider it, means there is a problem (and walking around with an iv in your arm is so temporary that using that as an argument isn't any better). We won't have to live with your decision...you will. So if an iv scares you...don't get it. If you want to talk yourself out of treatment for your child...please do so. But what you will NOT get is sympathy later.
The resources you posted aren't credible. I have not researched this topic, as I have always tested GBS negative. That said, if I were to research it, I would avoid any information that does not have peer reviewed science to back it up. Any hack can set up a website to spout their theories, but unless there is solid research to back it up, I would consider it just that: a hack theory. The Internet is marvelous in its ability to compile anecdotes and make them look like data. Look for better resources, talk to your doctor and pediatrician, and avoid midwife blogs.
Why are y'all fighting with her? For her to even consider it, means there is a problem (and walking around with an iv in your arm is so temporary that using that as an argument isn't any better). We won't have to live with your decision...you will. So if an iv scares you...don't get it. If you want to talk yourself out of treatment for your child...please do so. But what you will NOT get is sympathy later.
What I asked for was an alternative to receiving an IV, which as a PP has now said there are oral antibiotics for. No one asked for your sympathy, thanks though!
I'm pretty sure she was asking whether anyone had read anything about alternatives or side effects so that she could have an informed discussion with her doctor, not asking the board whether or not she should get the antibiotics. I haven't come across much about topic, so I'm also curious. It doesn't mean I'm not going to take the drugs. There are some really amazing doctors out there, but there are some really terrible ones as well. It's always best to be as informed as possible so that you can have a discussion and not just take medical advice blindly.
Also, my doctor told me today that you can take pills instead of an IV.
THANK YOU! I asked if anyone knew of an alternative to an IV and in turn was told that I'm some kind of demon mother who would rather skip an IV than have a healthy child. Reading comprehension isn't for everyone I guess...
Don't you think that alternatives to an IV would be a question for your doctor and not internet strangers? And the OP asked us for for our thoughts on declining antibiotics for gbs+ and that's what she received. This thread is not entirely about you, and no one said you were a "demon mother". Reading comprehension really isn't for everyone.
I'm pretty sure she was asking whether anyone had read anything about alternatives or side effects so that she could have an informed discussion with her doctor, not asking the board whether or not she should get the antibiotics. I haven't come across much about topic, so I'm also curious. It doesn't mean I'm not going to take the drugs. There are some really amazing doctors out there, but there are some really terrible ones as well. It's always best to be as informed as possible so that you can have a discussion and not just take medical advice blindly.
Also, my doctor told me today that you can take pills instead of an IV.
THANK YOU! I asked if anyone knew of an alternative to an IV and in turn was told that I'm some kind of demon mother who would rather skip an IV than have a healthy child. Reading comprehension isn't for everyone I guess...
Don't you think that alternatives to an IV would be a question for your doctor and not internet strangers? And the OP asked us for for our thoughts on declining antibiotics for gbs+ and that's what she received. This thread is not entirely about you, and no one said you were a "demon mother". Reading comprehension really isn't for everyone.
Right, my doctor's appointment is tomorrow as I mentioned. This is not an emergency and therefore not something I would call the office about when I'm seeing her tomorrow. An internet stranger was able to provide me with the answer that I was looking for, an oral antibiotic, that I can now in turn ask my doctor about at my appointment tomorrow. Nowhere did I say the thread was about me. Excuse me for paraphrasing the demon mother comment, I will give you that one.
I don't want to get yelled at, but for the poster who doesn't want an IV, you could also consider asking for something called a hep-lock if an IV is required. That way, you technically have the IV in your arm, but you're not tethered to an IV pole etc unless you need something. Not sure if that would help with your worries about the IV or if it's just the IV being in there in general that causes you angst.
I don't really like needles either, but for whatever reason after IVs have been put in me it doesn't really bother me. I think the best bet is to ask them to NOT put it in your ante cub (bend of your arm) so it's less distracting. Anyways, maybe neither of those suggestions help but if I wasn't having a c-section for breech delivery, that's what I would request for comfort. But, there's no way I would labor without an IV since a large part of the appeal of going to a hospital for delivery for me is having resources available if shit hits the proverbial fan and having an IV is a requirement to treating much of the shit that I wouldn't want anything futzing around trying to get in if I got hypotensive from hemorrhage or what not - but that's just me as a paranoid doc who has unfortunately seen too many sad cases and certainly doesn't need to be everyone's stance.
FWIW, I read about the oral antibiotic option as well because I wasn't thrilled about the IV antibiotics. My understanding is that treatment is considered less effective because GBS isn't something you get rid of forever. You could finish up the oral antibiotic 4 days before going into labor, and by the time you're actually in labor the GBS is there again/still. The goal of the IV is to eliminate the GBS at the exact point of delivery. But worth asking your doctor's recommendation for sure.
In one of the birthing classes my husband and I took the nurse teaching the class talked about this. She has worked in other countries (mainly England and Germany) where if you test positive they do further tests to see which strain you have. Apparently very few of the strains have the potential to cause infection in your baby. Hope that helps.
Here is a good article that supplies a lot of information on GBS. I can definitely see how many expectant mothers may deem the use of antibiotics to be unnecessary, especially when you consider the extremely minute chance that a baby will actually develop an infection.
Re: Declining antibiotics when Strep B positive- reasons? thoughts?
Here is some information I found. The
Cochrane Database is a place you can go to find a summary of studies performed on various subjects by non-biased medical researchers who look at hundreds of studies and come to a conclusion.
The Cochrane Collaboration Announces that
Intrapartum Antibiotics for GBS is not evidence based.
"There is lack of evidence from well designed and conducted trials to recommend IAP to reduce neonatal EOGBSD."
Translated: There is lack of evidence from well designed and conducted trials to recommend Intrapartum Antibiotics Prophylaxis to reduce neonatal Early-Onset Group B Strep Disease.
Sources:
Cochrane Database
https://www.gentlebirth.org/archives/gbs.html
Different Approach to GBS Colonization
It's well known that the percentage of babies who actually benefit from intrapartum antibiotics is very small. And, increasingly, the routine use of chemoprophylaxis (antibiotics) during labor is causing problems with resistant GBS or resistant e. coli.
So, in this area, some OBs and pediatricians have a new approach; for cases of prolonged rupture of membranes, they're only giving antibiotics if the mom runs a fever. Otherwise, they just do a simple blood test on the baby (can be done from cord blood or a heelstick if they miss the cord blood opportunity) to check for C-reactive protein. This is an indicator of an acute infection. If it's negative, everyone can be reassured that baby's fine, even though mom didn't get antibiotics; if it's positive (for whatever reason!), then baby will be appropriately treated for an acute infection. This has great potential for focusing the treatment where it is most needed and not exposing all the others to unnecessary side effects and increased risks from resistant bacteria.
And the OP asked us for for our thoughts on declining antibiotics for gbs+ and that's what she received. This thread is not entirely about you, and no one said you were a "demon mother". Reading comprehension really isn't for everyone.
https://sogc.org/publications/group-b-streptococcus-gbs-infection-in-pregnancy/