A Couple Questions! - Page 2

[Sarah Faith]

I think it totally does depend on the baby and who does it.

I opted to get it done b/c as the PP mentioned it screens for so many things that are SO easily treatable yet can easily cause death if undetected. Unfortunatly I had to get it done at a stupid hospital b/c as other posters have run into they don't do them at doctors offices. The first stick didn't get enough blood so he put on a warming pad and left for a few minutes and tried again and was able to get enough, DS SLEPT through it, I couldn't believe it. He had nursed to sleep before it and he just stayed zonked out.

Also, it isn't just the fault of Vit K, I think some kids are just good clotters to begin with b/c neither of my children had vit K and both of them had to have two pricks done b/c the first one didn't bleed enough.

ETA: the other problem we ran into is that they sent us the bill even though we have insurance b/c the test is ordinarily paid for by the hospital that the child is born in and they don't accept third party (ie insurance) payments. Talk about bias against homebirth.

[Serenyd]

It's a heel prick. My daughter had hers done at the hospital when she was a week old. I let her nurse while they pricked her heel. She didn't even pull off, and she is pretty sensitive. That was it. We did oral vitamin K, by Scientific Botanicals, so the vit K inj. was not an issue.

The main issue was that the hospital tried to charge us over $800 for the newborn screen and the newborn hearing test. HIGHWAY ROBBERY!
Luckily the insurance covered it but I would definitely try to get it done by an independent lab next time, if there is a next time. We have a pathology lab here in town I have used before, and I'm pretty sure I could have gone there or to the health dept. Moral of story, check how much it is going to cost first!

Heel prick vs. not finding out about a disease that needs immediate treatment and risking permanent damage, is a no-brainer in my book!

[ScarletBegonias]

Originally Posted by basje

I HAD to have it done in order to register the birth with the health department. I did a bunch of research and had my ped write a script to do the blood draw from the vain in her hand because according to a study in Stockholm 40% more of the time they were able to get it on the first try and newborns cried from something like 60% less time. Turns out state of CA only accepts PUK test samples drawn from the foot. So she got both done. But at least we went to the lab at the best children's hospital in 100 miles and they got both on the first shot no squeezing.

But if you state allows vain draws, maybe look into doing that instead.

idk about it being ca. both my kids, and this baby, will have been born in ca. while dd was a mw-attended hb and we got it done for dd, ds was a uc, and nobody ever said anything about needing it done to get a birth certificate (same county for both of those births).

[ttinker's nest]

A bad experience can leave you in a really negative place.

We didn't have a bad PKU experience until our third child.
After that, we refused with our fourth.

Not a responsible choice as a parent, just a 100% mama bear gut reaction because I had seen just *one* of my four babies go through a few really rough and upsetting PKU attempts over a few visits - which resulted in a hysterical baby who refused to nurse more than a handful of times in 72 hours, and would wake up screaming and couldn't be comforted. In the end, we never did get proper results either.

Thankfully, our fourth child is very healthy.

Having one negative experience on the journey, no mater what it is, can be difficult to move past.

I wish every baby had a smooth PKU experience.

Or, at the very least would come with a note as to their level of sensitivity to stimulation and/or their ability to clot well. Of course, in that case, the note could just tell us if they had any of the issues that a PKU panel finds... - hmmm, it may be time for this tired mama to go to bed now.

[claddaghmom]

sorry to bump an old thread....but I was just viewing the actual regulation for my state and it notes:

"The tests used must be dictated by accepted medical practice and approved by the Department. All newborn screening tests required by the Department of Health shall be performed by the Department's laboratories. The attending physician, certified nurse midwife, public health facility, ambulatory surgical center, or hospital shall assure that appropriate specimens are collected and submitted to the Department's laboratories."

So does this mean I can't privately do a PKU?

[Kidzaplenty]

Oh, you can do it privately for results, but to have it "on the record" if it is required, no you can't.

As for the whole "manditory" thing, I disagree with it as well. I have only had it done on three of my children. And I will not do it for any more of mine either. For me, I find it unnecessary and benefits are not worth it. But that is just me.

[UCmamaToMany]

I'm wanting to know the pros and cons of why some choose to not have it done vs having it done.

I did the PKU tests with my first 2 because they were hospital births, but my last 5 did not get it done and they are all happy and healthy. I am not planning on having it done with this next one either.

Still, I was wanting to know people's reasons as to why or why not.