Wednesday, April 7, 2010

birth decisions


our big easter party... i'm not too thrilled with my appearance in this picture, but i'm waddling now, i'm in that phase so there's nothing i can do. i'm not gonna look perfect. [because when i'm not pregnant i look perfect all the time, duh :)] saylor really does not like getting his picture taken and he was so overstimulated and tired from all the hub-bub that when we went to take this picture he just burst into tears... it was pretty funny actually, because it's not like him to just start sobbing. we had fun though and we've got a bunch of other things going on this month that will keep me distracted. i was quite excited to find out that i will get to have a real ultrasound when we shoot the commercial!!! so awesome. i was at a different practice with saylor and the 2nd ultrasound was at 35 weeks. at the place i am at now they do their second one at 19 weeks. and when i had it, the doctor rushed through it, didn't take time to find good pictures... i think i cried. it was pretty bad. so YAY! i'll have a pretend husband standing next to me acting excited but whatever yay!
so many decisions with childbirth! i feel very strongly on my not vaccinating or circumcising.... ok yes that took hours... months to research and decide but it seems like an easy decision now. the two things i'm diving into currently are antibiotics for myself during labor as at this point i am positive for GBS.. and the vitamin K shot. i am of course refusing eyedrops for her eyes as this is an antibiotic for STD's and the HEP B vax, which of course the midwives agree. they recommend antibiotics for GBS and the vit k shot though... and i've been spending hours reading about this... and my conclusions are...
i'm going to be retested for GBS and the prayer is that it will be negative. if so, i will share how i managed to do that!
if not, i still plan to not have the antibiotics unless my water is broken for more than 18 hours before labor, i go into preterm labor, or i develop a fever during labor. fortunately saylor's labor was short and i am praying this one is as well. my reasons for not wanting it, in a nutshell- i am allergic to penicillin anyhow so they next antibiotic they'd use would be even less effective. also for it to be effective you need at least 2 doses, every 4 hours. my labor with saylor was only 8 hours so i may very well not even have time to do it. and research shows the risk is so low of something happening, it almost equals the risk you have from taking antibiotics. besides allergic reactions, overuse of antibiotics is risky as well. i like this paragraph-

We can compare this to CDC estimates that 0.5 percent of babies born to GBS-positive mothers with no treatment will develop a GBS infection, and that 6 percent of those who develop a GBS infection will die. Six percent of 0.5 percent means that three out of every 10,000 babies born to GBS-positive mothers given no antibiotics during labor will die from GBS infection. If the mother develops anaphylaxis during labor (one in 10,000 will), and it is untreated, it is likely that the infant, too, will die. So, by CDC estimates, we save the lives of two in 10,000 babies-0.02 percent-by administering antibiotics during labor to one third of all laboring women. We should also keep in mind that this figure does not take into account the infants that will die as a result of bacteria made antibiotic-resistant by the use of antibiotics during labor-infants who would not otherwise have become ill. When you take that into account, there may not be any lives saved by using antibiotics during labor.
http://www.mothering.com/treating-group-b-strep-are-antibiotics-necessary

another link
http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/33/1/2v

http://rixarixa.blogspot.com/2008/01/group-b-strep-information.html
and this describes what i plan to use if i am still positive- wipes to use during labor

and here is a link for vitamin k info
http://www.gentlebirth.org/archives/vitktop.html

of course i don't want to put my child at risk in any way- i understand these things were started in an effort to save babies. but they don't come without side effects. in the vitamin k case, i think the low risk of HDN will be immediately reduced when we take time before cutting the cord- so long as it wasn't wrapped around the neck or anything, i'd like to wait until it stops pulsing and/or i deliver the placenta. a paragraph i like-

The forces of nature are so focused on a successful birth that it just seems unlikely that all babies are deficient in vitamin K. Instead of simply accepting that nature goofed about clotting factors in newborns, I thought about all the ways that interventions at birth interfere with the normal physiological birth process regarding clotting. The most obvious intervention is premature cutting of the umbilical cord; this deprives a newborn of 25% to 40% of the physiological blood volume, and thus 25% to 40% of the physiological clotting factors that nature intended to be present in the newborn's blood. As someone who does Newborn Screening heelsticks on newborns whose umbilical cords were not cut prematurely (and some of whom did not receive supplemental vitamin K), I can tell you that they have no trouble clotting normally. This solves the problem of early-onset or classical HDN.

i think i will also take a vitamin k supplement myself in the first 10 weeks after birth, as it will then increase in my breastmilk and that of course will go to my daughter.
this has been hours of research and i encourage others to do the same, no matter what you ultimately decide! be informed

2 comments:

Sarah said...

Such an interesting topic isn't it?! I was + for strep, had the antibiotics with both boys and they have both had to go through several rounds of antibiotics to clear up a very nasty ear infection (Sam actually had a ruptured ear drum...). Kind of makes me wonder what effect me having the antibiotics had on them...

jenny mae. said...

i love this entry!