MSE Pregnancy Club 26

BadlyWrittenPoem

BabaMoose wrote: »

I had my growth scan today. Booked in as they showed no growth between week 31-34 and it was dropping below the bottom line... Scan today showed the baby was slightly bigger than average, normal fluids, everything measuring wonderfully!
Slight panic when the first head measurement came up at 38wk5 (I'm just 35wk) but the next few were a little more standard *phew*

Glad to hear all seems to be well.

BadlyWrittenPoem

Finch7 wrote: »

Thanks for the replies! It seems a faff but I was thinking of the implications of a lever and it dropping down or pinging up - particularly during the night leaning in and potentially ejecting the baby across the room! (As I said my thoughts won't let go of this one!!)

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

BadlyWrittenPoem

Finch7 wrote: »

Just had a "heated discussion" with the receptionist in the doctors who was telling me due to budget restrictions they expect people to buy their own water sample pots from the chemist. Brings a whole new meaning to 'not having a pot to p**** in.' After listing several reasons why I thought this was stupid I was then told pregnancy was the only time you can now have free pots.

Am I missing something but why would anyone chose to take them if they weren't going to use them?!! Or is there an underworld of water sample pots I'm missing out on?

I think I'd just take it in in a sterilised jam jar if they refused to give me one.

BadlyWrittenPoem

amyloofoo wrote: »

I don't know how I've managed to avoid knowing this :rotfl: I was once helping a lady where Mum had delayed cord clamping but then had the injection about half an hour later so presumed it was just down to personal choice - on reading up though it sounds as though this will have been due to specific issues rather than usual practice.

It's not a big issue for me anyway, I'd be happy to have a physiological third stage, but I think I'd always just presumed that the 'type' of women who opted for one would opt for the other and that's why they always went together :rotfl: (sorry for how that reads, but you know what I mean )

I hadn't thought about the fact that it can be given *after* the cord clamping as standard practice is generally to give it just before you give birth. First time round the MW had it ready "just in case" it was needed but I don't know enough about it to know whether it would be worth having it as a precaution after delayed cord clamping or whether by that stage they would know that you either needed it or didn't.

deva

Could someone please explain to me the pros and cons of delayed clamping and the " placenta injection".

It's nearly nine years since I did this and don't remember it being discussed at all- it was a very quick turn around in hospital so little choice but just remember anti d injection and being congratulated on tummy shrinking quickly!? Possibly linked to raspberry leaf tea, which I must really begin as my seriously hurting labour stage was only three hours last time. Although some say it could be too quick this time- not sure if there is such. Thing as too quick!

kerri_dfw

Deva - I am completely clueless so just read this article: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/263181.php and now I'm even more confused. If delayed cord clamping improves iron levels, why is there a correlation in the increase in jaundice babies? Surely increased iron = less likely to be jaundice?

I have no idea what physiological third stage is?!?!?!

amyloofoo

kerri_dfw wrote: »

Deva - I am completely clueless so just read this article: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/263181.php and now I'm even more confused. If delayed cord clamping improves iron levels, why is there a correlation in the increase in jaundice babies? Surely increased iron = less likely to be jaundice?

I have no idea what physiological third stage is?!?!?!

Kerri and Deva, this debate was news to me before I started working on the ward too, I think it's a relatively recent development in this country at least.

I think the suggested link between delayed cord clamping and a slightly higher risk of jaundice has largely been disproved, more information here and here. The thought is that if the cord is left to stop pulsating by itself before being clamped then the baby receives the maximum amount of blood from the placenta - which studies have shown to correlate with better iron levels and some people believe may improve immunity and have other health benefits (although these haven't been proven).

For healthy babies born at term it doesn't pose any additional risks and may have some health benefits, so it's something I'm willing to try. Some people go further and try lotus birthing (don't click the link if the discussion of placentas has already grossed you out!) but whilst I'm very open minded - this is DEFINITELY not for me :rotfl: Of course if baby is born early / with low Apgars and needs immediate attention for any reason, then I'd consider that to be more important than delaying the cord clamping, but again it's something to discuss with your midwife / birth partner / doctor.

A physiological third stage is basically relying on your body's natural processes and hormones to deliver the placenta, rather than having a synt injection which is usually given to help speed up the process (more info here). It's one to discuss with your midwife and do some reading up on as there's some debate about whether the bleeding is heavier afterwards and whether it's suitable for people with low iron levels or an increased risk of PPH.

Hope that's helped and not just added to the confusion :rotfl:

Toothfairy4

amy, just had to google lotus birth... DEAR GOD!!

Finished work, was ready for it but it feels very odd. Don't think it has quite sunk in that I wont have to go in on Monday.

36+1

amus

1 word - ewwwwwwwwwewweww! That must reek!

I mean I can understand the physiological 3rd stage but keeping the placenta attached too!? Even animals will bite through the cord soon after birth so I'm pretty sure there won't be any 'natural' benefits to the placenta remaining attached.

BadlyWrittenPoem

amyloofoo wrote: »

The thought is that if the cord is left to stop pulsating by itself before being clamped then the baby receives the maximum amount of blood from the placenta - which studies have shown to correlate with better iron levels and some people believe may improve immunity and have other health benefits (although these haven't been proven).

In terms of blood volume, I don't have the figures to hand but apparently the amount they lose out on by immediate cord clamping is greater percentage wise than they allow an adult donating blood to give.

Also, the WHO recommends delayed cord clamping on the basis of the research evidence. I read a lot of their stuff about it seven years ago during my first pregnancy including random reports about traditional cord stump care practices around the world.