Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Immediate skin-to-skin contact with unstable newborns improves survival chances

medlifestyle.news

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 236 posts

Re: Immediate skin-to-skin contact with unstable newborns improves survival chances

#151

Post by MarketingJason »

I wish we could have experienced this. Our OBGYN didn't catch (after we insisted) that the baby was breach. After 2 hours of labor we were rushed to an emergency c-section.

I'm thankful that my wife did get a little skin-to-skin but it was not immediate and it was for maybe 5 minutes before they were seperated. I think we got to see our baby about an hour later.

The whole experience during and after was horrible but I'm not sure if we or the hospital could have handled it better other than if we had insisted more strongly that the position felt wrong weeks before delivery.

Re: Immediate skin-to-skin contact with unstable newborns improves survival chances

#152

Post by gambiting »

rootusrootus wrote: post #135
gambiting wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No offense, but that's such a weird way of looking at it. Even in the US every reasonable adult would say that driving on public roads is free, right? But roads are maintained from taxes so how dare you call them free!!! It's the same thing here - other countries just pay for their citizens giving birth from taxes. The cost to you as a citizen is zero. No it's not free, someone pays for it. But I never used the word…

> every reasonable adult would say that driving on public roads is free, right? No? I certainly don't. I'm constantly aware of how much we don't spend on roads. Any conversation trashing the US for not having healthcare that is free-at-point-of-sale is meaningless without discussing the larger system. What can I say, I get tired of Europeans trashing the US using singular metrics as if they're a meaningful reflection…

>>No? I certainly don't. I'm constantly aware of how much we don't spend on roads.

Let me ask this then - is there anything in the world you would call free, or do you avoid the word out of principle?

>>Any conversation trashing the US for not having healthcare that is free-at-point-of-sale is meaningless without discussing the larger system.

I think you are purposefully trying to drag me into a discussion about a point I didn't make, I merely expressed surprise at the fact that United States of America, the wealthiest nation in the world, cannot even pay for the births of its own citizens. No statement anywhere about healthcare as such. If you want to read into it in my comment, then that's on you.

>>You want to get into a more interesting conversation, let's talk about how the US citizenry is essentially subsidizing the universal healthcare that many other countries enjoy.

Let's have that discussion then, please, I'm curious to hear your thoughts.

Re: Immediate skin-to-skin contact with unstable newborns improves survival chances

#153

Post by spockz »

ezekg wrote: post #94
mensetmanusman wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The U.S. experience used to be this way, but about 100 years ago the medical industry realized they could make a lot of money off of child birth (our last bill was $40k). The hospitals released advertisements scaring women from voodoo (read: black) women/midwives helping with birth so that doctors and surgeons could take over, it worked fantastically. The doctors eventually chained women to beds and tested various ch…

Midwives are the way. My first child's prenatal and birth was < $5k, born at home.

Amazing. In the Netherlands it is free. You get a midwife, hospital and medical staff when required. You get a box of goods for the first days of baby care. We get 4-6 weeks paid leave as a father and 16 as a mother. There is help in the house for about a week to take care of baby and mother and do checkups.

The only thing you pay a symbolic amount of money for is some to borrow tools like bath chairs.

Probably some pain meds require a contribution but you never pay the whole thing.

Children up until 18 are insured on your own insurance policy without additional fees.

It must be hell to live in a cold place as the US where everything costs tons of money out of pocket.

Re: Immediate skin-to-skin contact with unstable newborns improves survival chances

#154

Post by Stratoscope »

jjeaff wrote: post #141
kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then you have to deal with the circumcision sales pitch.

We never heard even the slightest hint of a sales pitch for circumcision. A single question of whether we were planning to do it or not was all.

In fact, we had an anti-circumcision pitch. They showed a video of the process. It was horrible and makes me queasy just remembering it.

Re: Immediate skin-to-skin contact with unstable newborns improves survival chances

#155

Post by johncessna »

carlmr wrote: post #120
reacharavindh wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am very sorry for what you went through. I lived in the US for 6 years, and worked at above average tech company and had excellent healthcare benefits through employer. I must admit it blinds people to say "country's messed up healthcare system is not my problem" because my employer took care of it :-( Before my move to Europe, I risked living in the US for a month without health Insurance, and I was very anxious a…

>it blinds people to say "country's messed up healthcare system is not my problem" because my employer took care of it :-( This is something I never understood. If your employer is in power of your health insurance, how free are you?

I'm not saying it's a good system, but I'm not following your logic here. If the government is in power of your health insurance, how free are you? I can change my employer a lot easier than I can change my government.

Re: Immediate skin-to-skin contact with unstable newborns improves survival chances

#156

Post by M5x7wI3CmbEem10 »

reacharavindh wrote: post #33

Interesting to read this here. When my son was born (naturally, normal weight, fully healthy, and around expected due date), the midwife in Denmark had educated us about the Danish way of handling the birth - as soon as the baby comes out, they literally put the baby on mom’s chest, and leave us(parents, and baby) alone in the room for about an hour. Nothing needs to be done other than the baby being in care of it’s…

how do you manage getting around the hospital system? seems overwhelming with having a different language, and it isn't as simple as going to the ER I assume

Re: Immediate skin-to-skin contact with unstable newborns improves survival chances

#157

Post by thanatos519 »

CPLX wrote: post #31
thanatos519 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Congratulations! My kid was also a preemie and got kangaroo care alternating with being wrapped in a UV-emitting blanket. Now he is 8 and still blows me away every day with his kindness, smarts, skills and ... uh ... argumentation. :) The benefits of kangaroo care are worth studying, but the results of the study are about as unexpected as the 'your cats love you back' study.

> the 'your cats love you back' study Hold on, your cats love you back?

I don't remember which study it was, but a quick search will find quite a few, e.g. https://www.inverse.com/science/how-do-i-know-if-my-cat-love...

Re: Immediate skin-to-skin contact with unstable newborns improves survival chances

#158

Post by jacobolus »

blhack wrote: post #70
reacharavindh wrote: post #33

Interesting to read this here. When my son was born (naturally, normal weight, fully healthy, and around expected due date), the midwife in Denmark had educated us about the Danish way of handling the birth - as soon as the baby comes out, they literally put the baby on mom’s chest, and leave us(parents, and baby) alone in the room for about an hour. Nothing needs to be done other than the baby being in care of it’s…

This sounds exactly like the process my wife and I are going through in the US right now. I’ve never heard of pregnancy being treated like an “illness” (??). Midwives are also extremely common here. Granted I live in Arizona, and I know much of HN lives in SF. So maybe this is unique to Arizona in some way?

> I know much of HN lives in SF

SF has more options for different types of prenatal/delivery medical experiences than most regions of the US, and has been ahead of the trend for years. My 2 kids were delivered by midwives in a hospital focused on respecting parents’ choices to the extent possible.

Re: Immediate skin-to-skin contact with unstable newborns improves survival chances

#159

Post by brnt »

spockz wrote: post #153
ezekg wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Midwives are the way. My first child's prenatal and birth was < $5k, born at home.

Amazing. In the Netherlands it is free. You get a midwife, hospital and medical staff when required. You get a box of goods for the first days of baby care. We get 4-6 weeks paid leave as a father and 16 as a mother. There is help in the house for about a week to take care of baby and mother and do checkups. The only thing you pay a symbolic amount of money for is some to borrow tools like bath chairs. Probably some…

Parental leave in the Netherlands, both for women and man, is the lowest in the EU. By a wide margin. So, while we get some things right, leave and the conseqences that implies for the carreer of the mother is not something we can boast about.

Re: Immediate skin-to-skin contact with unstable newborns improves survival chances

#160

Post by [deleted] »

whall6 wrote: post #107
in_cahoots wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The country’s c-section rate is somewhere near 33% when most estimates say it should be around 15%. That’s a pretty good indicator of systematic over-medicalization.

Lots of women I know elect to have C-sections.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN