Mothering › Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › Birth and Beyond › If you knew your baby was more likely to need interventions after birth
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

If you knew your baby was more likely to need interventions after birth

post #1 of 24
Thread Starter 
would you go ahead and get the Vitamin K shot? I was planning on just signing a waiver for the eye goop and Vit. K, but with twins, I'm concerned that would open them up to having issues if they needed blood draws, etc. My primary objection is that I don't believe in doing things that aren't necessary for newborns, but if it could actually help them, I don't want them not to have it. And I'm not sure I could object to the eye stuff and not the Vit. K. Thoughts?
post #2 of 24
I object to the eye ointment and not the vit k. My babies come out fairly battered and I've been comfortable consenting to the vit k. But, I don't have STDs that would necessitate the eye ointment, so we decline.

Odd though, here vit k is optional but the eye ointment is 'law'. You should look into it where you are giving birth.
post #3 of 24
Thread Starter 
I'm going to ask in my tribal area. I'm not sure how I would object to the silver nitrate and the Hep B vax but not the Vitamin K. I'm also not sure if I can take a philosophical exemption to the Vit K and silver nitrate. It's a lot to think about!
post #4 of 24
Is it a legality thing in PA? I thought it was just for schools, not medical procedures. Here in IL, you can consent/deny what you want without explanation in the hospital (ideally and legally). What about oral Vit. K? Have you asked your pediatrician about that?
post #5 of 24
Thread Starter 
From what I am seeing, I can claim a religious exemption to the Vit. K and eye ointment and will need to sign something at the hospital. I can claim a religious/philosophical exemption to the Hep B. I know for sure the Vit. K and eye ointment are otherwise required by law at birth. I'm trying to find out about the Hep. B.

Unfortunately, I won't know the ped until the birth. My doc is a family doc and won't be at the birth and I'll just get whoever I get. I'm trying to find out if oral K is an option, but if I am remembering correctly, it isn't. I mean, I could get some and give it to the babies I guess, but it's not FDA approved so the hospital won't have it.
post #6 of 24
Are you sure it's silver nitrate and not erythromycin or some other simple antibiotic? Not all places use the old silver nitrate protocol....
post #7 of 24
Most places use antibiotics now instead of silver. Personally i would object to the unnecessary use of antibiotics (super bugs, anyone?). Vit K is also not a vax, like Hep B. And you shouldn't have to claim an exemption, just refuse it. Unless it's the law in your state (are there any states that req it?), you don't have to give your doc a reason to not get the Hep B.

All that being said, i had a HB and my DS did get Vit K just because my MW recommended it after seeing how battered he was at birth.
post #8 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by annettemarie View Post
I'm going to ask in my tribal area. I'm not sure how I would object to the silver nitrate and the Hep B vax but not the Vitamin K. I'm also not sure if I can take a philosophical exemption to the Vit K and silver nitrate. It's a lot to think about!
I live in Indiana, and with dd3 I declined the Hep B and eye goop but consented to the Vit K and had no issues at all.
post #9 of 24
I don't know the answer specific to PA, but I'm glad you brought it up, AM. There's definitely a chance I could deliver here instead of making it over the boarder , and it never occurred to me that I might face different laws.

In NJ, I never had any difficulty refusing eye goop, hepB, and cord goo while accepting vit K. Well, not in 2003 or 2007, at least. We didn't refuse anything before then, and haven't delivered since (yet!) I never had to give any particular reason for refusal, either.
post #10 of 24
What's cord goo?
post #11 of 24
Now, take this for what it's worth, because I have not actually given birth in PA yet, but I am told by mama friends, that in PA, there is no problem objecting to some, but not all of the vaccinations. In contrast, when I was in D.C., it was all or nothing. But, that was in the context of school registration.

What I did in D.C. when my sons were born was to refuse Hep B at birth, saying that we delay vaccinations. That happens to be true--I do vax my kids, but I spread them out. Waaaaay out, in the case of something like Hep B. I think the likelihood of them becoming needle-sharing drug users or having unprotected sex is still remote at the ages of 4 and 2, so they have not had hep B vaxes yet.

If this baby stays in long enough that we can avoid a NICU stay, I plan to do the same (membranes ruptured at 28w5d, so there's a chance it'll come early). If we end up in the NICU, given the chance of transfusions, I will consent to Hep B.

On a somewhat related note, unfortunately, I don't know where you are in PA, but I have contacted the pediatricians in central Pa/Harrisburg area who are known for being okay with delayed vax/no vax, and both practices have informed me that they no longer accept patients who don't vax on schedule.
post #12 of 24
In CA it was no problem at all to refuse the heb B, eye goop, and still get the vit K (I was paranoid about a car accident ). This time if we make it at home, I'll do oral K, maybe just for me in fact.

I hate that the law makes it so tricky for people! I can't believe there are places where it's illegal to refuse some of this stuff. Arg!
post #13 of 24
I live in GA. I refused the erythro eye ointment, but not the Vit K. It was no problem here.
post #14 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnneCordelia View Post
What's cord goo?
Triple dye- the purple stuff.

We've always done dry cord care (no alcohol), but only decided to forgo the triple dye with the last two. It actually caused quite a stir with our pediatricians (who didn't even bat an eye at some of the other refusals, lol), which is interesting, b/c triple dye seems to have fallen out of favor in many hospitals since then!
post #15 of 24
I agreed on the Vitamin K since ds was struggling a bit. I refused the eye goo and no one really seemed to care.
post #16 of 24
I would absolutely get the Vitamin K shot if I thought my baby would be needing medical treatment.

I don't understand why you would need to claim exemption from either that or the eye goo - they are medical treatments, not vaccinations.
post #17 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Twinklefae View Post
I don't understand why you would need to claim exemption from either that or the eye goo - they are medical treatments, not vaccinations.
It's to do with the PA law. It's required by law that they give the eye goop, and I think the Vit K might also be required. I live in NJ, and here it's required that they OFFER it, and I think most places are the same, but PA is different. You need to claim religious/philosophical exemption to refuse them.
post #18 of 24
Thread Starter 
Yep. I linked to the law in my thread in the PA tribe. I'm going to ask about antibiotic vs silver nitrate. I'd actually have less of an issue with an antibiotic. I'm still not thrilled, but I don't know that's I'll fight it. I need to think about that.
post #19 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by annettemarie View Post
Yep. I linked to the law in my thread in the PA tribe. I'm going to ask about antibiotic vs silver nitrate. I'd actually have less of an issue with an antibiotic. I'm still not thrilled, but I don't know that's I'll fight it. I need to think about that.
They still use silver nitrate where you are?
Here it's antibiotic ointment in the form of e-myacin. I didn't even know they were using silver nitrate anymore!
post #20 of 24
Thread Starter 
The page I linked to says they can use eitehr, but they probably use antibiotics. Like I said, I need to ask.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Birth and Beyond
Mothering › Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › Birth and Beyond › If you knew your baby was more likely to need interventions after birth