-
It was standard protocol where my son was born in the US. My daughter was born in Austria and didn't have it, no one said anything about either.
-
I honestly have no idea, I had a C-section and she went straight to NICU.
-
We did it, but not until after our hour of skin-to-skin. We did the Vitamin K shot as well, and I'm glad we did.
-
We did after some skin-to-skin time. They took him to put on a diaper and did all that stuff then. It took just a couple minutes and they gave him right back to me.
-
No. She was born in the UK and they don't do it, at least at the hospital where I had her.
-
We did, I don't remember if they asked us if we wanted it or not. They gooped her up after our skin to skin time and private hour together. I didn't worry about it interfering with her being able to nurse since they are basically blind then anyway and everything is just a blur - they will root around and find the boobies.
-
@Rockies11: that's a good point.
Honestly I just went with it. I didn't really see a reason not to do it.
-
We did. It had no impact on bonding.
With DD2, they didn't even take her and wash her/weigh her/put the goop in her eyes until at LEAST an hour after she was born (maybe two?). We had lots of cuddling/nursing time.
-
We're doing both, during skin-to-skin time. I don't think declining is an option where I am, just a matter of when.
-
It's strictly state mandated in NY, can't refuse it without getting child protective services involved, so yeah, we'll do it. They do say they'll delay it for 59min, though (it's required in the first hour), and can do it while I'm still holding him/her. I kinda feel like maybe other bacteria besides STI could also cause infections/blindness for the babe, though? So maybe can't hurt?
-
We refused it due to being certain of not having any STIs. Nobody made a big deal of it, it was just explained why they do it and then we were asked if we wanted it or not. We did get the vitamin K shot.
-
I did not do the eye goop. I was tested for all STD's at 37 weeks (as is protocol at my birth center) and both DH and I have only ever been with each other so I knew it was completely unnecessary.
With vitamin K I decided I would wait and see. I wasn't planning on giving it, but since she had a traumatic birth and her chances of internal bruising were higher, we chose to do it.
-
I saw no negatives to doing it- eyesight isn't something I'm willing to mess with even though there was little to no risk of an infection.
-
I opted not to because I'm allergic to erythromycin, which is what the ointment is. I was sure of my sti status anyway and they tested me at 37 weeks I think, so I figured why take the tiny risk that she would be allergic too. If not for my allergy I would have.
I did all the other standard stuff.
-
@Foodnerd81: my bff's baby had an allergic reaction to it.
-
They must have, but I honestly don't remember. In looking at her newborn pics I don't see it on her. I'll have to ask my Husband, I had some problems after birth so I was per-occupied with oxygen and too many nurses to see what was going on.
-
It was required at my midwife practice to do a full blood work-up at the first prenatal appt which included STD testing. I was negative for all of them, so we skipped the eye stuff.
-
We did the eye goop...I didn't really see it as a big deal. It's just eye ointment, it's not like they are putting anything harmful on the baby.
-
I'm in NY also, so it's mandated, but I was fine with it anyway.
-
Nope for the same reason, I had to sign a waiver declining. We did vitamin k
-
@Mae: I was also against it; however, one midwife mentioned it protected against other bacteria/ickiness... such as any poo that might transfer during LO's birth, so we opted in.
I ended up having an emergency forceps delivery, after baby was born, the gel or the new born shots were the last thing I could care about (total whirlwind that first hour).
-
@MrsBeluga: Interesting. I haven't seen anything in any of the research that shows it protects against anything other than gonnorhea or chlamydia. I definitely plan to discuss this with my midwives at my next appointment.
Re: the "well why not?" question...
I guess the "why not" is that there are risks with any medication. I'm allergic to a lot of stuff (don't know if I am allergic to erythromycin... I've never used it) so I worry a lot about drug allergies.
Also "why not" doesn't seem like the best reason to administer meds. If there is no "why" (except the possibility of my husband cheating on me?)... "why not" just doesn't seem like a good enough reason to me..
-
@Dandelion: I'm sorry for your friend. Do you know what the reaction was? I'm not even 100% sure I am allergic to it-- my dad and sister definitely are, and I got hives while I was on it when I was like, 8, so they just assumed it was the Erythromycin. Haven't tried it again.
-
@Foodnerd81: I think his eyes turned red and puffy.
- Google Plus
- Stumbleupon
- Twitter
- Facebook
- Pinterest
- Favorite0
63 comments