Declining needles for baby at birth

[meow]

I'm sure this must have been discussed here already, but I can't find it so if someone can feel free to post a link.

I'm just wondering why some people choose not to give their baby injections at birth? We have decided to postpone the Hep B vac as I believe birth is too young to be getting vaccinations. But I'm wondering about the Vit K- if you choose oral over needle you have to give it to them 3 times on certain days... the needle seems easier. Why do you choose oral? Is it simply about avoiding jabbing tiny little bubba? Or something more 'medical'?

[Pandora]

I think that there is a less likliehood of reaction from the oral dose than the needle, but I cant remember for sure.
I know we delayed on of the injections until the day I was leaving hospital as one of the effects it could have was to interfere with feeding, and we were having enough problems in that department already.

[Arimeh]

I know we had the Vit K injection just for ease I think. I don't think he suffered any effects from it, not that I could tell anyway. His problems with feeding were to do with his neck not a needle. Having said that, we didn't get the Hep B one at birth cos the midwife advised us not to, as its not needed if you aren't going away in the first two months of their life? So we didn't do it. However, if you don't do it, you don't get the immuisation rebate thingy from the government. Not sure if that is an issue or not for you? It wasn't for us. :-)

[BellyBelly]

The studies are all over the place - the first one linked the injection to childhood leukemia, the next found no link then the next found a small link to it - so very confusing. So its a matter of what you want really, but its an easier decision if you have had a healthy vaginal birth - if you have had a forceps/traumatic birth might be better to have it. You can also supplement your diet with vitamin K, as baby will get it through breastmilk.

[leebee81]

We have declined hep b but have agreed to Vit K. The problem we were told with the oral dose is that there can be issues with getting it all swallowed, it needs to be given in multiple doses... and something else I can't remember.

Neither of us is a Hep B risk and the baby won't exactly be out getting tats and picking up strangers in bars for the first two months so it can wait. Also, there is a 20 odd year history of Vit K being given with little side effects so we decided to go ahead. I might change my mind once I have the baby in my arms though.

[smiley10P]

We gave neither the Hep B or Vit K, since all babies are born with low levels of vitamin K, we figured their was a reason for low levels we also did a physiological third stage also, keeping it all natural here thanks

[Lulu]

I don't see the point of the Hep B and I still think it's wrong to introduce it. Thats why!

No one ever questioned me or hassled me about it.
You can still rec the immunization allowance regardless.

[Loqua]

My friend and her DH decided against the Vit K jab and, until they left the hospital, her DH had to stand guard by the baby's crib! Every time a nurse came to perform checks, they'd make a remark about bubs not having had the needle, and make preparations to do so... regardless of them explaining repeatedly that they did not want that for their child. They were so pleased to finally be out of there.

[Trish]

Both Tehya and Abbey had niether the Vit K or the Hep B injections at birth. Just my personal reasons there.

I never had any issues at all regarding it. They were both HB's. Abbey however, when she was admitted to hosp at 10 days with jaundice, I found that on her paperwork, among the reasons for us being in there was to have the hep b shot. I was asked a few times if I wanted her to have it until I one nurse finally brang over a decline to consent form for me to sign. All fixed.

[Nelle]

Riv had neither - I need to read up on it all again, it's all gone fuzzy in my mind since 17 months ago! But I think that I was prepared to consider Oral vit K if the birth was particularly traumatic for him...not sure on that, that's just off the top of my cruddy memory.

And yep, the Immunisation Payment can be received by anyone - non immunisers/alternative schedule immunisers just have to sign a Conscientious Objectors form at their dr's - I guess to show that their choice has been given some thought and isn't due to laziness.

[kim73]

My son was born 7 weeks ago. He is my 6th child & I finally felt that we needed to have conntrol over his birth & what he was given. My last 2 received the jab at birth & it didn't sit right with me. I birthed at a natural birthing centre this time & queried them on why it was given at birth. Their answer was that it was the best way to ensure all babies received it (do it then & there while the mother doesn't have to make the decision to physically take the child to get it immunised).

The poor babe has just come into the world & we flood its little precious body with a vaccination.

As for VIT k...we didn't have that either. The midwives said babies are born with what they need (of course they are...why can't things just be left as nature intended?). They only supported it if there was a birth trauma.

The other biggie which most people don't realise is that the injection they give you to deliver the placenta is completly unneccessary most of the time also. I chose not to have it & my placenta came away painlessly about 10 mins after the birth. Previously when I have had the injection it was like birthing another baby because it makes your uterus contract strongly which is painful!

Until I had number 6 I always thought the three injections were necessary (except the hep B). I was never asked if I wanted them for myself & baby. They were givemn to me without explanation. This shows how medicalised birth has become. To give the mother back the decision making empowers her to feel she is doing what is right for her child. It helps pyschologically with birthing, breastfeeding & beyond to know that you are in control.

Kim

[Schmickers]

As both of our births were natural, we decided against the vitamin K. We were prepared to give it if, for some unfortunate reason, the birth was traumatic for the baby. And I disagree strongly with Hep B vaccine being given routinely at birth for babies not in a high-risk group for contracting the disease. An incredible waste of money and resources, not to mention the risk involved in giving a newborn baby a vaccination.

[sasha]

We went for the Vit K, but not the Hep B. Neither of us work in high risk areas, nor are we considered a high risk group so I didn't see a reason for him to have a vax straight after birth. He had it at 2 months with the rest. I might consider the oral vit K with this one... have to look into it.

[Neenee Jellybeanie]

I know we had the Vit K injection just for ease I think. I don't think he suffered any effects from it, not that I could tell anyway. His problems with feeding were to do with his neck not a needle. Having said that, we didn't get the Hep B one at birth cos the midwife advised us not to, as its not needed if you aren't going away in the first two months of their life? So we didn't do it. However, if you don't do it, you don't get the immuisation rebate thingy from the government. Not sure if that is an issue or not for you? It wasn't for us. :-)

Aparently you still do - you just have to lodge a form . . . what's it called? A something objection form, basically saying you won't get your child immunised because you've researched it and don't think it's the best thing.

[BellyBelly]

And it's not just the vitamin K or whatever is in the vaccination to consider, its all the other crap that goes with it into their poor little bodies.

You might like to have a squizz of the vaccination article on the main site.... and for terminology's sake I say vaccination instead of immunisation... because the latter implies an outcome...

10 Reasons Why Parents Choose Not To Vaccinate

[meow]

Thank you all for so much excellent feedback! I've been reading some more about the Vit K and I tend to agree that in a non-traumatic birth there wouldn't be a need. I also like the idea that baby has the level of Vit K they are supposed to have- our bodies are pretty smart.

Re: vaccinations, that's a whole other kettle of fish huh? So much info to filter!

[Lea79]

My friend and her DH decided against the Vit K jab and, until they left the hospital, her DH had to stand guard by the baby's crib! Every time a nurse came to perform checks, they'd make a remark about bubs not having had the needle, and make preparations to do so... regardless of them explaining repeatedly that they did not want that for their child. They were so pleased to finally be out of there.

I don't understand that because written consent along with explanations need to be given before anything else can take place....interesting though!

[mountain mummy]

The thing that the midwives explained to me about the vit k is that the oral dose is actually 3 or more times higher than the injection.

As far as vaccinations, I have conscientiously objected for all of my kids so far, and signed all of the forms when booking into the hospital. Of course, you still get certain medical "professionals" questioning your decision (I even had the local early childhood nurse begging me to reconsider, for the safety of the other children they come into contact with!) My kids are all healthy and the only childhood disease they have picked up has been chicken pox (which isn't on the immunisation schedule anyway! Or should I say, not that I know of - it wasn't up until the birth of my last, but I haven't checked recently!)

I really do think it's all personal choice though, and I am glad to have that choice!