or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › Birth and Beyond › Rhogam research
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Rhogam research

post #1 of 9
Thread Starter 
Hi all- I have read all the threads but am looking for some research to back me up for not receiving Rhogam pre natally. TIA-
post #2 of 9
Ah, well, here's some information:







All in all, it appears that the largest risk with prenatal Rhogam was the mercury in it. More places now have mercury-free Rhogam (you could inquire with your care provider if your area offers this), so it's not an issue.
post #3 of 9
Also, rhogam is a human blood product, which carries with it all of the dangers, however, small of HIV and hepatitis.

It is highly refined which should cancel any disease danger.
post #4 of 9

Those are awesome sites!
post #5 of 9
Many brands of Rhogam are now mercury free!

My hubby's Grandma was RH- back in the 50's. After having her first child she had a ton of complications and even miscarried a late-term baby. She still cries about having her tubes tied to prevent further complictions and how the procedure went against her strong Cathloic beliefs.

I too am RH-. Injecting myself with a blood biproduct was a bit scary, but it was worth it to me to have two healthy babies. I did however make sure my Rhogam was mercury free.

Can you explain why you do not want Rhogam?
No judgements here.
post #6 of 9
The reason I refused rhogam is because the titres drawn through pregnancy showed no problems.

Also, rhogam is a medical intervention that takes care of another medical intervention which is the pulling on the placenta and early cutting of the umbilical cord which increases the chances of the maternal and fetal blood mixing.

I would prefer to wait until the birth of the baby and take a cord sample from the baby and a sample of bllod from the mother, test it and give the rhogam within 72 hours of the birth.

This was the protocol of my homebirth doctor 20+ years ago, and I feel it is still sound advice.
post #7 of 9
Thread Starter 
Avery's Mom- it is not that I dont want Rhogam if it is needed. After researching it a bit, and the wonderful responses here at MDC, the prenatal Rhogam is really not necessary. The risks of the Rhogam are higher than the risks of blood mixing in utero. The prenatal injection is based on the drug company's recommendation, not research.
At birth if the baby tests to have positive blood then a post natal injecton should be done. But if the baby is negative there is no need. The injections are for future pregnancy.
One point that was written well on another thread was why are other womens antibodies OK and not our own???
So if after giving birth my baby I find out my baby is RH positive I will have another injection.
Another point is that if your practioner is suggesting a prenatal injection you should have a blood test to see if you have developed antibodies.
As always there is a lot of information. I cant say that I have found ANY information stating that a prenatal injection is necessary. Only recommended (by the makers).
Hope that answers your question. There is another great thread on this in Vaccinations.

Lori-gratefulmama to Cassidy 6-1-02
post #8 of 9

Thanks for the wonderful response! Best of luck with your pregnancy!

post #9 of 9
One other thing: before getting the shot, have your DH's blood tested. We are both O-, so can only have a child with O- blood. (I'm not sure about all the possible combinations of parent/child blood types, but it would be worth asking your practitioner about.) We just signed a form stating that we declined the Rhogam because it was medically unnecessary. (My MW also agreed it was unnecessary, but had to file the paperwork for state law.) I also agree that the need for it prenatally is very very small, and you may be better off waiting to find out your baby's blood type before getting the shot.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Birth and Beyond
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › Birth and Beyond › Rhogam research