Can we discuss the Eye Ointment again? - Page 2

[lovebug]

Originally Posted by nashvillemidwife

It's for chlamydia, gonorrhea, and syphilis. The other STDs are viral so not affected by antibiotics. They give it to every baby because despite a negative test, you can never know for sure that a woman does not have it. The test could have been a false negative, or she may have picked up the bacteria since the test was performed. Unless her partner is by her side every minute, every woman who is sexually active and does not use condoms is at risk for an STD; therefore every baby who comes out a woman's vagina is at risk too. If you are certain this is not the case with you and your baby it is your right to decline, but the provider and hospitals have to consider the basic truth everyone is at risk when making their policies.

thats just silly to me, but i guess i can understand. but nevertheless that just crazy talk from DRs... thanks for answering my question i do not mean the snark at you i mean it for WHY the babies HAVE to get it based on that...

[LaffNowCryLater]

Originally Posted by nashvillemidwife

It's for chlamydia, gonorrhea, and syphilis. The other STDs are viral so not affected by antibiotics. They give it to every baby because despite a negative test, you can never know for sure that a woman does not have it. The test could have been a false negative, or she may have picked up the bacteria since the test was performed. Unless her partner is by her side every minute, every woman who is sexually active and does not use condoms is at risk for an STD; therefore every baby who comes out a woman's vagina is at risk too. If you are certain this is not the case with you and your baby it is your right to decline, but the provider and hospitals have to consider the basic truth everyone is at risk when making their policies.

This is certainly true for me, I haven't DTD since DH was deployed and my STD screening was several weeks after that (according to my dates, I got pregnant the week before he left).

[LaffNowCryLater]

Originally Posted by mamatolevi

call the PP dept and ask to speak to the nurse manager.

I did that (called a few actually), they were all very uneducated on the rules and regs.

[mamatolevi]

Originally Posted by Kidzaplenty

There were no opt out options and no way to refuse without CPS being automatically notified. My religious exemption form for vaccines was good enough for shots, but was not an valid excemption for the eye ointment.

Did the nurses tell you this or did CPS tell you this?

If the hospital told you this I'd take it with a grain of salt. Nurses can only try to enforce hospital policy (and must if they want to keep their jobs.) If hospital policy is to call CPS, that's their decision and one they need to make to protect the hospital. (notice I said "hospital." calling CPS is a policy that has absolutely nothing to do with protecting the child.) I would be stunned if CPS came knocking on my door over this if I were to refuse the eye drops; they have bigger fish to fry.

[mamatolevi]

Originally Posted by LaffNowCryLater

I did that (called a few actually), they were all very uneducated on the rules and regs.

Which basically makes my argument that the hospital and staff have no credibility when it comes to the threats they make over this (and other refusals). If they aren't educated as to their own rules, they certainly can't be considered knowledgeable when it comes to how the law applies.

the hospital can still retaliate against parents who don't comply, but that's all it is, retaliation. So it's always a matter of what battles parents are willing to fight to enforce their parental rights.

[Kidzaplenty]

It is hospital policy and will happen, not just the nurses spouting off. Now, I was not worried about CPS showing up as I do know how to handle them, but at the moment of decision, DH thought it would be best to just give in rather than deal with it. We had already caused enough waves to last them a lifetime. DH figured it was one battle we should give to them. We did not fight the Vit K shot either as DS was a traumatic birth with much head bruising, so I don't know how refusing that would have been.

[LaffNowCryLater]

I'm a big policy nerd, I love picking through and reading policy manuals I'm gonna ask for a copy of the policy when I pre-register. Our law only says "prophylaxis". It used to name 2 antbx but that part of the code was wiped off in 2008. I would love to know why.

[lunita1]

This is an interesting thread. I refused eye ointment at my last two hospital births and no one batted an eye.

[callieollie]

I had no problem at my son's birth when I refused the eye ointment. They just mentioned it, I said we decided not to do it, they said that I'd have to sign a waiver, I said OK and that was the end of it!

[nashvillemidwife]

Originally Posted by LaffNowCryLater

I'm a big policy nerd, I love picking through and reading policy manuals I'm gonna ask for a copy of the policy when I pre-register. Our law only says "prophylaxis". It used to name 2 antbx but that part of the code was wiped off in 2008. I would love to know why.

In Tennessee the names of the drugs were removed because 1) silver nitrate is no longer used and 2) it's possible that erythromycin may one day become ineffective, scarce, or replaced by a better drug so it's best that the law accommodate for that. You made a very good point earlier about using breast milk since the law does not specify what the prophylaxis has to be.

[gcgirl]

Originally Posted by nashvillemidwife

In Tennessee the names of the drugs were removed because 1) silver nitrate is no longer used and 2) it's possible that erythromycin may one day become ineffective, scarce, or replaced by a better drug so it's best that the law accommodate for that. You made a very good point earlier about using breast milk since the law does not specify what the prophylaxis has to be.

But since you have colostrum and NOT breastmilk right after birth, would that still be effective? I'm thinking yes, but can someone clarify? Thanks. This is an idea I hadn't thought of, but I like it.

[hapersmion]

As people have said, I think different hospitals react differently. Some really do call child services, some don't make any fuss at all. Unfortunately, I really doubt that they'll tell you beforehand how they'll react - when calling hospitals, you'll probably just get the party line of "eye ointment is required!"

With midwives that I've talked to, it's easier - they hand you the tube of ointment and you sign a sheet that says you've been provided with the prophylaxis. Then you do whatever you want to with it. Perhaps you could get the hospital nurses to let you take care of it?

Another option for you might be to get your doctor to sign a medical release. If your other children have all had a reaction to the ointment, it seems like a really good idea not to give it to this one. Worth a try, maybe?

Good luck!

[LaffNowCryLater]

Originally Posted by gcgirl

But since you have colostrum and NOT breastmilk right after birth, would that still be effective? I'm thinking yes, but can someone clarify? Thanks. This is an idea I hadn't thought of, but I like it.

I am still nursing my 18 month old so I was planning on pumping sometime in the next few days and freezing it or something just in case. I think colostrum would be fine too, but it would be hard to pump right after birth to have enough for both eyes within an hour of birth (which is what TN law is). Not sure if freezing would effect any antibacterial properties or not but DH and I have used once-frozen BM for pink eye with excellent results and I doubt the hospital would ask if it was thawed milk.

[anj_rn]

As a former NICU nurse I thought I might pipe in (although I would like to start by saying I declined the ointment for my dd). Most hospitals have a policy that the nurses have to use a specific prophylaxis (in our case erythromycin oint). There are LOTS of cases of infected women who end up with these diseases and do not have a clue (usually b/c their hubbies keep re-infecting them). Some hospitals do have a policy to call CPS for refusals, but I have never had CPS actually come out unless the refusal was treatment needed for the child to live.

With all that being said, if you are confident that you are not at risk for STDs, then you should feel free to refuse the eye ointment. However, most hospitals do not ask, they just do it, so your child should be accompanied at all times post-partum.

[Banana731]

Originally Posted by Kidzaplenty

The hospitals here are required to call CPS if you refuse the eye ointment. So, that is something to consider.

What state is this? I want to make sure I never move there. That's crazy.

[terrabella]

Originally Posted by Kidzaplenty

It is hospital policy and will happen, not just the nurses spouting off. Now, I was not worried about CPS showing up as I do know how to handle them, but at the moment of decision, DH thought it would be best to just give in rather than deal with it. We had already caused enough waves to last them a lifetime. DH figured it was one battle we should give to them. We did not fight the Vit K shot either as DS was a traumatic birth with much head bruising, so I don't know how refusing that would have been.

Huh, for the hospital birth that we refused, they never said anything. They were much more concerned that I refused an immediate pitocin shot. They just shrugged about the eye drops.

[LaffNowCryLater]

I talked to a very reliable person and was told I can refuse it if I want Hopefully the lack of knowledge of the law on the hospital staff's part won't give me any stress.

[mamatolevi]

Originally Posted by LaffNowCryLater

I talked to a very reliable person and was told I can refuse it if I want Hopefully the lack of knowledge of the law on the hospital staff's part won't give me any stress.

If they give you any grief, just ask for someone from the legal dept to come visit you.