Vitamin K Shot? - Page 2

[Raene]

Originally Posted by SandraS

The hospital can't force anything. You can still refuse (I did).

In some states like New York, you CANNOT refuse, no matter what. Religious exemptions don't matter for VitaK and eye drops. They will (and do) call CPS on you right then and there if you try and refuse, and CPS takes your babe away for several days, administers the shot and drops, and then gives baby back to you eventually.

It sucks. That's one of my motivations for a homebirth.

I personally am refusing the VitaK and eye drops (with my homebirth midwife). Unless you have an STD the eye drops seems really unnecessary. I've heard mixed things about Vitamin K, but I trust in nature that all will be well.

[SandraS]

Originally Posted by Raene

In some states like New York, you CANNOT refuse, no matter what. Religious exemptions don't matter for VitaK and eye drops. They will (and do) call CPS on you right then and there if you try and refuse, and CPS takes your babe away for several days, administers the shot and drops, and then gives baby back to you eventually.

It sucks. That's one of my motivations for a homebirth.

I guess it's a good thing that CPS is so bored with real abuse cases that they can waste their time with this?

I find that NY is the only state that forces this. Ya'll need to be talking with your state representatives and telling them they need to be spending their resources fighting actual abuse and neglect.

That's abuse, in and of itself, IMO, forcing a treatment that's not wanted nor necessary. No way would I step foot in a hospital then. I wonder if they "let" healthy moms and babies go home right after birth or if they hold them hostage against their will?

That's ridiculous.

[littlebb]

Absolutely no to both. If you are planning on breastfeeding, eating a lot of raw greens (spinach, romaine, broccoli, etc.) will take care of any Vit K deficiencies naturally except in a tiny percentage of special cases.

[Raene]

Originally Posted by SandraS

I guess it's a good thing that CPS is so bored with real abuse cases that they can waste their time with this?

I find that NY is the only state that forces this. Ya'll need to be talking with your state representatives and telling them they need to be spending their resources fighting actual abuse and neglect.

That's abuse, in and of itself, IMO, forcing a treatment that's not wanted nor necessary. No way would I step foot in a hospital then. I wonder if they "let" healthy moms and babies go home right after birth or if they hold them hostage against their will?

That's ridiculous.

Agreed. It's so sad. I'm not very good at organizing/finding the right people to contact, but I wish something could be done.

[blissful_maia]

Originally Posted by littlebb

Absolutely no to both. If you are planning on breastfeeding, eating a lot of raw greens (spinach, romaine, broccoli, etc.) will take care of any Vit K deficiencies naturally except in a tiny percentage of special cases.

This isn't true and is a very common misconception. In fact, breastmilk for the first week or two has very, very low fat content and Vitamin K is a fat-soluble vitamin. Almost all cases of Vitamin K deficiency bleeding happen in exclusively breastfed babies. Of course, it's still exceedingly rare, so statistics are difficult to gather/interpret.

[pinksprklybarefoot]

I do the vitamin K but no eye goop.

[ErinsJuneBug]

Still undecided. The late hemorrhagic diseases can occur 6 months after birth, and the research I have read shows that only 40% of cases have symptoms. However, the risk IS extremely low. I def won’t be doing the injection, because of its link to childhood leukemia (which actually is about the same risk as the acquiring the late hemorrhagic disease without the vit K injection).

If anything I think I’ll supplement the baby with the oral form of vit K (It is NOT the vaccine given orally). However, because the oral form is so cheap there really haven’t been many studies about if it even works. So....I don’t know. I’ll prob won’t do anything. lol.

[DaisyMay]

We did have the Vit K - what worried me was the later onset problem that would be less easy to identify as we'd be less hyper-vigilant than in the first couple of weeks and even though super rare, seemed too super-scary to take the risk. I'm not totally sure, but I remember reading somewhere that high Vit K levels in mom pre-birth and during breastfeeding, though good for you, doesn't actually impact baby's Vit K levels meaningfully. Still taking Alfalfa or other Vit K source is good for your post-partum recovery and bleeding, just won't help baby. We didn't give eye ointment as no STI, no need.

[AlexisT]

I did it last time and will again. The leukemia link was debunked, and it seems so little risk for a potentially large benefit.

No eye goop last time because it was a CS, we'll see this time.

[BekahMomToOliver]

We did vitamin K last time and probably will again. I would opt out of the eye goop, but alas I too am in Ontario, so we can't. I really don't like that stuff though!

[triscuitsmom]

Originally Posted by MOMYS

I've declined the Vit K, but will reconsider the oral Vit K if the birth is traumatic. The eye ointment unfortunately is required by law in Ontario.

Originally Posted by BekahMomToOliver

We did vitamin K last time and probably will again. I would opt out of the eye goop, but alas I too am in Ontario, so we can't. I really don't like that stuff though!

Just a note to the Ontario Moms... I understand it's public health law, but you can still refuse. What will happen afterwords depends on where you are birthing, your care provider, and your location. There is at least one person on this thread already who is in Ontario and refusing eye ointment and I'm another...

Just thought I'd through that out there depending on how strongly you feel about it

[mwherbs]

supplementing mom has been studied to a small degree- most moms do not even get the rda for their own needs- so increasing that can only help in general
unfortunately the numbers are not small in many areas of the US the reason NY has manditory vitamin K is because of the research they have- the number of incidence of vitamin K related bleeds in their newborn population put the incidence at about 1-2/1000,-this personally tallies with what I have been hearing from midwives- who often will give a baby who is brusing or has other symptoms some vitamin K in the weeks postpartum- the trouble with that approach is that 1/3-2/3's of vitamin K bleeds may start in the brain before there are other signs or symptoms of a bleed. other parts of the world have much lower incidence - Japan for one the average mom gets between 3-4 times the US rda so about 300-400 /day ( for the average woman in the US this is probably about 6-8 times as much vitamin K foods as she normally eats)
green veggies and fermented soy products- the greens actually give you a higher amount if they are cooked- but cooked or raw eat them everyday- for your long term health as well as to protect your baby

[amydiane]

Originally Posted by blissful_maia

This isn't true and is a very common misconception. In fact, breastmilk for the first week or two has very, very low fat content and Vitamin K is a fat-soluble vitamin. Almost all cases of Vitamin K deficiency bleeding happen in exclusively breastfed babies. Of course, it's still exceedingly rare, so statistics are difficult to gather/interpret.

Originally Posted by AlexisT

I did it last time and will again. The leukemia link was debunked, and it seems so little risk for a potentially large benefit.

I have been back and forth on the Vit K and I'm particularly interested in these 2 statements. We have currently decided to skip it and up my intake with nursing, largely because of the supposed leukemia risk (although also because I'm a little wary of messing with nature, so to speak....perhaps it starts out low for a reason). So any info on effectiveness of raising the levels through nursing, or proving or disproving a leukemia link would be appreciated.

[blissful_maia]

Originally Posted by amydiane

I have been back and forth on the Vit K and I'm particularly interested in these 2 statements. We have currently decided to skip it and up my intake with nursing, largely because of the supposed leukemia risk (although also because I'm a little wary of messing with nature, so to speak....perhaps it starts out low for a reason). So any info on effectiveness of raising the levels through nursing, or proving or disproving a leukemia link would be appreciated.

I will post some abstracts/links later today or tomorrow.

[amydiane]

Originally Posted by blissful_maia

I will post some abstracts/links later today or tomorrow.

Cool, thanks!

[soontobemom333]

good morning,

I am about 38 weeks now and I really don't want to get the vitamin k shot or the eye drops or even the blood sample from babys heel.  I was wondering what you meant by "refusing them access" regarding the shot?

thx

[milomama]

I'm deciding on Vitamin K myself, but thought I would mention that I am in Ontario and I declined the eye drops with my first born in 2009, so it is absolutely not necessary.  It was a hospital birth with a midwife and it was no problem whatsoever.  I just indicated I did not want to drops, and they didn't do them, although it's law, you're allowed to opt out.

[onetwoten]

I believe you just have to sign a refusal stating that you opted out. 

We had planned on opting out of the VitK, but I pushed for 2.5 hours, and she got a little bit stuck on the shoulders, so we opted to do it after all. We did however wait about 8 hours instead of having it done right away. 

It wasn't mentioned, but we also declined the newborn screening until 3 days post birth (we were home already, but went to a lab to have it done). This saves her the terror of it being done right after birth, and also the test is more accurate after 72 hours. Might be worth looking in to. 

[aeterna]

Originally Posted by AlexisT 

I did it last time and will again. The leukemia link was debunked, and it seems so little risk for a potentially large benefit.

I know this is an old post, but since it was bumped, I want to reiterate this ^^. I'm on the Droid ATM, so can't really post the relevant studies, but found the data easily obtained when I was considering which to permit at the hospital. Vit K and leukemia link was debunked, and with no other real potential complications I determined to allow that injection.

I refused the erythromycin as I do not have chlamydia or gonorrhea, as proven by 10 years of annual well woman exams and the mandatory pregnancy STD test, so unless they've changed their minds about catching that from toilet seats, I was comfortable saying there was no chance at my having one of those. =P

I also declined them testing my son's blood type after birth to determine whether I required a Rhogam shot. I am A-, my DH is AB-, my OB ran the tests themselves. "Sometimes things happen and the baby can be born with a positive blood type anyway, it happened just last week to another patient who said her and her husband were both negative," the nurse tried to tell me. "Perhaps she was confused about the father of her child," I replied politely. This isn't an algebra class, lady. Two negatives do not make a positive. I learned the basics of a punnet square in sixth grade. >.<<br />
I don't mind mitigating reasonable risk if there are reasonably low side effects, but I'm not letting you stick and slap goop on me and my kid if there is literally no reason to do so besides "that's just what we do." =P