Does this sound right?!?! (re: vernix)

[YankeeMomInVA]

Okay... so I have mentioned before that we plan to decline baby's first bath at the hospital unless DH and I can do it ourselves in our room and unless they'll let us wait at least a bunch of hours before we do it.

Well... a friend of mine, who is a nurse at one of the hospitals in my particular hospital's system, gave me grief about that today... She told me that "not only is it a hazard to the nurses" (which I've heard before...and replied that they could just wear gloves and a mask when handling him)...

But she also said to me, "And it's also done because some babies are born with a very thick coat of vernix on them and it's a hazard to the BABY because it's a breeding ground for bacteria"


That just doesn't sound right to me...I mean... first off, it's not like he's going to have an inch thick coating of vernix on him! Secondly, they rub the baby off when he's born anyway to stimulate his breathing, etc, so it's not like if there WAS a thick coating that a good part of it wouldn't be already gone!

I'm certainly not letting her sway me....I just think that's such a ridiculous excuse! Has anyone ever heard that vernix is BAD for the baby in those first 24 hours of life?!?!?

[Curlita]

No, I have never heard that. I have always heard the opposite. When in doubt, I always assume that our bodies are low maintenance. So, no scrubbing under foreskin, no soaping vaginas, no douching, no removal of various parts and pieces, and assume most things are there for a reason.

Except for ear wax.

[Undercover Hippie]

I agree with Curlita, I assume it's there for a reason and not likely to hurt them. You're right, a lot of it will come off on the blankets after birth. I've just heard to rub in what is left on the creases and such, and that it is a good moisturizer for their skin.

My babies have both been late, so not a lot of vernix. But I don't think my DD got a bath in her first 24 hours, or if she did it was just a wet washcloth to get the gunk out of her hair and some meconium off, and she was just fine.

[mittendrin]

Sure, yeah, and amniotic fluid is highly toxic, too. Wow, the stuff some people come up with...

[Lizzie9984]

Sounds like a load of BS to me, I'd ask your nurse friend for the literature and studies to back that up. She had to have heard it somewhere, which means if it's true it's out there for her to make a copy of---unless she pulled it out of her hind end!

[dcgrl]

I've read that vernix helps protect the newborn from infection, and if you're birthing in a hospital, your baby is better off with it than without it. Google "antimicrobial vernix" for literature (scientific, peer-reviewed) you can share with your friend.

[GinaRae]

This is my last little boy just after he was born and I don't think the pics give justice to the vernix he had. This is after he was initially rubbed off as well:

http://s198.photobucket.com/albums/a...nt=Image13.jpg

http://s198.photobucket.com/albums/a...ent=Image6.jpg

Even if I am in a hospital instead of a homebirth, I plan to give the babe some time in his vernix. I don't see any reason to immediately strip him of it all. Lots of HB babes are not officially washed for many days and I haven't heard of their fingers falling off from infection.

If babe is stinky or the vernix is becoming a problem, I'll wash. But otherwise, I think it would help babe not peel and get all scaly like they sometimes do.

I don't see what it is about vernix that makes everyone think it's so dangerous! Now, I admit if I were a nurse I think I personally might be a little queasy about handling a baby with vernix all over it, but that's what gloves are for.

As an OB nurse you're dealing with amniotic fluid, poo, urine, sweat, vomit, blood and more on a daily basis!!! You don't freak out. You do your job!

[cheeseRjedi]

We're leaving it on. It's good for their skin.

[Valerieg]

I've heard the vernix is good for the skin. It protected them in the womb. Why wouldn't it be protective out here too?

But we didn't have any trouble with DD's first bath. It occurred many hours after she was born (and I didn't even have to request that) and I was the person primarily bathing her. So I suppose it depends on the hospital.

[YankeeMomInVA]

I'm glad to hear that my gut reaction, which was.. "Uh... WHATEVER!"...was on target!

This particular hospital doesn't allow dads into the nursery and since DH did DS's first bath in the nursery in the hospital (different hospital of course!) we want him to do be the one to do it this time, too!

So I added a line to my birth plan that says something like, "We decline baby’s first bath unless it can be done ourselves in our room at least several hours after birth and have the baby re-warm either by skin to skin contact with mom or IN our LDR room on the warming table."

[GinaRae]

That's what I do not get about some hospital policies! Taking the baby to a nursery to bathe or watch, and putting them under a warmer there because of course baby is cold! This makes me irate.

[monocyte]

Not only is it antibacterial, but it serves a purpose...it is also insulating given that the baby has been 98 degrees for 9 months, and is now propelled into a 60 something degree room (thus need for skin to skin...)

I was reading up on this last night in a panic to do my birth plan (yeah, still not complete...) and am really going to fight this one. I want all RN's to wear gloves for the baby's protection - he/she should be colonized by the bacteria from our family, not from the nurses.

DS barely had any vernix, sadly...I was so hoping for a cheesy baby!

[GinaRae]

That's a VERY good point! The nurses would be introducing their own bacteria to the baby, and possibly bacteria from other families in the ward.