Personally my future births will be Lotus Births, so again, cord blood
donation is not something that fits into my beliefs or research in that
regard.
However, I'm interested to hear that you've witnessed cord blood collection
done with a physiological third stage. To my understanding, the
instructions that come with a CBR kit state "as soon as possible" in regard
to when to collect the blood; and all the accounts of cord blood collection
I've seen/read have had actively managed third stages with the length of
time ranging from 15 second to 1 - 2 minutes at absolute maximum. This
leads me to believe that STANDARD practice for cord blood collection
involves actively managed third stage and premature amputation of
placenta/cord. If this is not the case I'd be delighted!
Also, the literature seems to indicate you need to collect about 150cc;
would this be possible in truly delayed cord clamping (5 minutes or even an
hour is not really delayed clamping; often the cord is still pulsing at the
umbilicus for 1 1/2 to 2 1/2 or more hours).
Another thought I've seen expressed and that I see merit in is that
according to the Red Cross, "To give blood, you must be healthy, at least 17
years old, and weigh at least 110 pounds." Most babies at birth are
unstable, 0 minutes old and weigh less than 10 pounds. Do we have a right
to make our newborns become blood donors?
Another issue that springs to mind (and this is just thinking aloud), is the
potential drug content of the blood in cases where the Mother has accepted
drugs during labour. Would this have any impact?
Many people consume their placentas (partially or fully) as an aide against
haemmorhage; or freeze them, to do with them later what they AND the child
who lived in the placenta decide then. Or they bury them as homage to their
child and a symbolic returning to the Earth from whence they came. In these
cases, one would assume the cord clamping (if done at all) was GENUINELY
"delayed" (ie: hours, at least); so the baby has been truly given all they
need and are entitled to from their placenta before it is removed (if
removed at all, rather than left to come away naturally). This is a
different matter to cutting the cord and removing blood from it/the placenta
to be given to another (most likely unknown) individual at a later date.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Belinda Maier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au>
Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 6:11 AM
Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Cord Blood Donation
My experience with mothers doing this was not of early cord clamping but
of physiological 3rd stage. We would have to wait for the lab person to
come so the cord was clamped and cut when they got there and had stopped
pulsating. The blood obviously does not flow (for the collection) as quick
but unless a woman wanted a lotus birth, for retrieving cord blood cells
it is the best of both worlds. Obviously little can be done if the
placenta simply births. The aim is to get the blood from the placenta not
the baby. Once the baby gets what it needs and the cord stops beating then
to my mind it is like donating breast milk; beautiful, rich; life giving
and invaluable to the recipient.
The concept of the blood belonging to the baby it interests me. i agree
absolutely in the case of cord clamping before the cord has stopped
pulsating. But even if we bury the placenta we are returning it to the
earth, if we use placenta/woman/baby blood and use it on a person as we
all die then eventually it will still be returned to the earth.
Belinda
Stephen & Felicity wrote:
I wouldn't contribute my baby's cord blood because that blood belongs to
my baby, and that's where it's going, every last drop until it stops by
itself and the placenta comes away naturally. Cord blood donation
requires early cord clamping which for reasons I probably don't have to
explain to those on this list is not something I would subject my child
to. To my knowledge, cord blood is the best locale of stem cells, but
it's not the ONLY one; there are other methods of obtaining them. So I
can't see any good reason to prematurely amputate my child from their
life source at birth (carrying all the risks to their health and
wellbeing that come with this practice) and give their cord blood to
someone else for their possible health and wellbeing; it doesn't seem
logical to me as a Mother.
----- Original Message ----- From: "brendamanning"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au>
Sent: Tuesday, July 04, 2006 12:49 PM
Subject: [ozmidwifery] Cord Blood Donation
I have been asked this & would be very interested to hear others views. I
am fairly sure she means CB donation, not storage of blood for later use
for her children.
"I've been meaning to ask you for a while about cord blood donation and
in
particular why people don't seem to do it. I picked up a brochure from
the
hospital and read it. I think I want to do it since it will otherwise
just
end up in the bin but am just wondering whether others know more about it
and are therefore opting not to do it. Can you tell me what the cons of
doing it are or the possible controversial issues."
With kind regards
Brenda Manning
www.themidwife.com.au
--
This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics.
Visit <http://www.acegraphics.com.au> to subscribe or unsubscribe.
--
This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics.
Visit <http://www.acegraphics.com.au> to subscribe or unsubscribe.
--
This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics.
Visit <http://www.acegraphics.com.au> to subscribe or unsubscribe.
