or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › I'm Pregnant › How to best educate my OB (and myself) about delayed cord clamping?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

How to best educate my OB (and myself) about delayed cord clamping?

post #1 of 11
Thread Starter 

I just recently switched to an OB whom is supposedly very supportive of having a natural birth at a hospital.  We spent a good hour talking during my first appointment with her about my birth preferences and the type of birth I want this time around.

 

My concern was over our discussion about delayed cord clamping until it stopped pulsating.  I was under the impression that it could be a good 10 minutes before the cord stopped pulsating.  She told me that no- it was around 1 minute max, and that is when she typically clamps/cuts.  She also made some comments as to the position of the baby once it was out in relation to the placenta. 

Basically telling me that if she were not to cut the cord, then the baby couldn't be placed on my stomach right after birth because (1) it wouldn't be able to reach as the cord is short so basically baby would be between my legs?

and (2) if the baby was above the placenta then the blood would be draining down so it would have to be below?

 

I am now very confused.  I hope some of you home birth/ natural birth mamas or midwives can help shed some light on this topic.  Are there articles I can share with my OB regarding this issue?  She seems fairly open and sympathetic to my thoughts so I am hoping simply sharing some facts with her would resolve this dilemma.  And also what are the known facts at this point to delayed cord clamping and baby position?

 

Thanks!

post #2 of 11
I'm sure your OB believes what she told you, but she is sadly misinformed!

You can find tons of stuff on Google just searching for "risks of early cord clamping" or "benefits of delayed cord clamping." Here's one study: http://www.qtnpr.ca/files/1241.pdf

And an article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/6949700.stm

And another study: http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/297/11/1241.abstract

Really, there is tons of stuff to read about it!

It's annoying to me that in all the studies I've seen they consider *2 minutes* to be "delayed!" But even 2 minutes is vastly better than nothing. You have the right to demand no clamping until the cord stops pulsing completely. If it's still pulsing it means that the baby is still getting blood from the placenta, and that blood belongs to the baby--it is a birthright! The only "problem" I've read about anywhere due to "delayed" cord clamping is a slight increase in risk for jaundice. I'll take that if it means not stealing blood from my baby when s/he needs it most to be strong right after being born!

With my first baby, (home birth) we waited until it had stopped pulsing completely--I'm not sure how long it took but it was definitely closer to 10 minutes (maybe longer?) than 2 minutes. For the record, he had zero jaundice.

I do have one friend who had a short cord and the baby could be placed on her belly but couldn't reach her chest, but from what I understand that's very rare. I've never heard of a baby's cord being so short that the baby could only be between the mother's legs! (Although I guess it's possible that it's happened before?)

Typically the cord is plenty long enough for the baby to be on the mother's chest before the cord is cut. My baby's cord was probably long enough for me to have held him above my head if I'd wanted to!

All the stuff about the baby needing to be above, below, or level with the placenta is BS in my opinion--that's not really how blood vessels work. Why mess with nature's design? Babies are meant to be held by their mothers in the first moments after birth, and there isn't supposed to be a mad rush to cut the cord immediately. It's just common sense. Forgive me if I sound obnoxious, but this one really gets my goat!
post #3 of 11

just subbing! I'm glad you asked.  I have the same question.

post #4 of 11

To piggyback on this question - what about delayed cord clamping with a Cesarean birth?  Is it even possible?

post #5 of 11

The book Gentle Birth Gentle Mothering has a very informative chapter or two about it.  Overall, a wonderful book!!

post #6 of 11
Thread Starter 

Thanks for the articles- I think I will print one out and bring it into my next appointment.  I hope I can at least convince her with the 2minute delay...better than nothing.  I wish I could have had a homebirth for this one, but its not an option for me atm.  I am hiring a Doula and will try to stay home as long as possible- I am hoping for a much more natural birth this time around!

post #7 of 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by radicaleel View Post

I'm sure your OB believes what she told you, but she is sadly misinformed!

You can find tons of stuff on Google just searching for "risks of early cord clamping" or "benefits of delayed cord clamping." Here's one study: http://www.qtnpr.ca/files/1241.pdf

And an article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/6949700.stm

And another study: http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/297/11/1241.abstract

Really, there is tons of stuff to read about it!

It's annoying to me that in all the studies I've seen they consider *2 minutes* to be "delayed!" But even 2 minutes is vastly better than nothing. You have the right to demand no clamping until the cord stops pulsing completely. If it's still pulsing it means that the baby is still getting blood from the placenta, and that blood belongs to the baby--it is a birthright! The only "problem" I've read about anywhere due to "delayed" cord clamping is a slight increase in risk for jaundice. I'll take that if it means not stealing blood from my baby when s/he needs it most to be strong right after being born!

With my first baby, (home birth) we waited until it had stopped pulsing completely--I'm not sure how long it took but it was definitely closer to 10 minutes (maybe longer?) than 2 minutes. For the record, he had zero jaundice.

I do have one friend who had a short cord and the baby could be placed on her belly but couldn't reach her chest, but from what I understand that's very rare. I've never heard of a baby's cord being so short that the baby could only be between the mother's legs! (Although I guess it's possible that it's happened before?)

Typically the cord is plenty long enough for the baby to be on the mother's chest before the cord is cut. My baby's cord was probably long enough for me to have held him above my head if I'd wanted to!

All the stuff about the baby needing to be above, below, or level with the placenta is BS in my opinion--that's not really how blood vessels work. Why mess with nature's design? Babies are meant to be held by their mothers in the first moments after birth, and there isn't supposed to be a mad rush to cut the cord immediately. It's just common sense. Forgive me if I sound obnoxious, but this one really gets my goat!

Exactly this. I just had a homebirth on the 24th and my MW's don't cut the cord until after the placenta has been delivered(barring an emergency of course). My babe was on my chest immediately after being born and the cord was more than long enough and I don't know what she's talking about as far as the other issue...as pp said blood vessels just don't work that way.
As to jaundice my baby was slightly so but nothing bad...but all my babes have had it slightly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
post #8 of 11

I had the same experience as L&K'smommie with both of my homebirths with the baby on my chest or belly as we waited for me to deliver the placenta. That being said, a friend who delivered in the hospital and is a doctor herself told her husband to insist that he wanted to cut/clamp the cord. Even though he didn't think he wanted to do so, and I'm not sure if he did, it guaranteed that there would be a delay in cutting since the staff was respecting the birth plan, which the dad was right there to defend.  Good luck.

post #9 of 11

we had a natural birth and didn't cut the cord until the blood was drained. it took about 5 min and i had my son on my lower chest /stomach the whole time. i had had to be careful to not pull him up but he reached me just fine. stick to what you want. my OB didn't support it either but it was my delivery and not hers.

post #10 of 11

This is a fantastic talk on delayed cord clamping BY AN OB. And not a whacky fringe one neither ;) I reccommend you watch it for some facts to have in your tool box but maybe, just maybe you can figure out a way to get your OB to watch? http://youtu.be/cX-zD8jKne0   Cause that would be awesome.

Personally, unless you have a really short cord, putting baby on belly should not be a problem (belly at least if not boobs, which is fine--still skin-to-skin). Short cords do happen though. I had a VERY short card and didn't get to have delayed clamping. Here's hoping your cord plays nice ;)

post #11 of 11
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by thaidyed View Post

This is a fantastic talk on delayed cord clamping BY AN OB. And not a whacky fringe one neither ;) I reccommend you watch it for some facts to have in your tool box but maybe, just maybe you can figure out a way to get your OB to watch? http://youtu.be/cX-zD8jKne0   Cause that would be awesome.

Personally, unless you have a really short cord, putting baby on belly should not be a problem (belly at least if not boobs, which is fine--still skin-to-skin). Short cords do happen though. I had a VERY short card and didn't get to have delayed clamping. Here's hoping your cord plays nice ;)

Wow, what a great talk- I watched the whole thing (all 4 parts)!  Now I am trying to come up with creative ways to get my OB to watch it herself..."here let me lend you my iPod with a loaded video I thought was insightful"...whistling.gif
 

 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: I'm Pregnant
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › I'm Pregnant › How to best educate my OB (and myself) about delayed cord clamping?