Printable View
Hi all,
A lot of articles seem to say that the cord should stop pulsating before it's cut to get most out of the blood transfer to bub before it's cut.
I was talking to the midwife at our antenatal class and she said in her experience there is no concrete evidence that waiting till it stops pulsating brings maximum benefit. And also that there have been cases where when prolonging the cut, can cause jaundice.
I'd appreciate any thoughts/feedback on this, please.
like most things there are atleast 2 sides of the story!
letting the cord stop pulsating first is great for baby.....
clamping it straight away is great for the doctor who wants to get home quickly.....
juandice can be rectified by a bit of sun light(not all babies have to go in for phototherapy)
but also look at if you want a phisiological(sp) 3rd stage no oxitocin to expell the placenta. if you do then its best to leave the cord to pulse so your body knows what is going on and can do it its self
Does anyone know how long the cord should pulsate or till it stops pulsating before it's clamped?
I think it is a couple of minutes. Huge benefits for the baby to wait till pulsations stop. Google it to find out. And I havent read/known of any link to this and jaundice. Sounds rather strange to me!!!
I'm going to have them wait. It seems like a lot of "established" birthing practices have little or nothing to do with the "medical" reasons put forth, and everything to do with what's easiest for the doctor.
Ex- woman in bed, flat on her back (when we're told from 4 mos on that lying like that puts pressure on a major vein, blocking blood flow to the placenta) to push and deliver her baby. Its like pushing uphill, entirely counter-intuitive if you think about it. It's easiest for the doctor to catch the baby, that's all. I'm of the opinion that not waiting for the cord to stop pulsing is of the same ilk. I mean, seriously, how could it be a bad thing for baby to have plenty of nutrient and oxygen rich blood when they're still working out the mechanics of eating and breathing?
There are great benefits to the baby by delaying clamping, but there is a very minimal risk that by getting all the blood that they can get jaundice, but evidence of this isn't conclusive enough. There is a fantastic article about it here https://www.bellybelly.com.au/birth/...-cord-clamping.
I wanted this to happen with my 4th birth, but as he was born with the cord around his neck and it being compressed by his body, it needed to be cut immediately because he was blue and needed to get out. Also is baby is born a bit 'flat' there are two schools of thought - 1 that it is best to leave baby attached to the cord to get the oxygenated blood or 2, that the cord needs to be cut so the baby can be worked on. talk to your caregivers about different senarios that could happen and what their 'rules' are on the matter and try to work out a compromise if you need it. I had to negotiate to have mine in the first place because I'd had a PPH with my 3rd birth, so we agreed to 2 minutes max before cutting or if I showed signs of bleeding then it was to be cut but in the end I couldn't have it anyway.
Many believe there are more risks to the baby to cut it early than not. Because there are no harmful side effects if you don't clamp it, only good things, yet harmful because of the things the baby is deprived of if cut early.
Stem cells. Iron. White blood cells. Red blood cells. 'Killer-T' cancer fighting cells and so on. Studies, yes actual studies which I believe IS proof especially when they are all saying the same thing (see my article Sherie has linked above).
Cord Clamping - has heaps of links to cord clamping info and studies.
You really gotta do your own research and be responsible for your own decisions. Just because the people you speak to THINK they know the current research, its pretty clear they don't.
Thanks all for all your feedback. I will do more research and talk to my ob next week.