Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m in the US and most hospital does the same now. They call it the golden hour where it’s just an hour of skin to skin just like you mentioned with no baby health routine until after such.
...and despite it being essentially a time period where the hospital leaves you alone, you still get billed for it.
Immediate skin-to-skin contact with unstable newborns improves survival chances
81–90 of 236 posts
Re: Immediate skin-to-skin contact with unstable newborns improves survival chances
#82I'm sceptical of single study medical research and especially that which involves the crazily political world of birth. It might be better to wait until the Cochrane collaboration does a meta analysis on multiple studies before anyone changes what they are currently doing.
The conclusion may be 'keeping baby warm' increases the survival rate. I agree with you, these researches are too vague, there are so many parameters, correlation maybe.
Re: Immediate skin-to-skin contact with unstable newborns improves survival chances
#83Interesting 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?
Re: Immediate skin-to-skin contact with unstable newborns improves survival chances
#84Interesting 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…
But we've had instant skin to skin (after a quite o2 check, but within minutes) for both pregnancies, even the "urgent" c-section (not quite "emergency", but better safe than sorry, story for another time).
Re: Immediate skin-to-skin contact with unstable newborns improves survival chances
#85Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m in the US and most hospital does the same now. They call it the golden hour where it’s just an hour of skin to skin just like you mentioned with no baby health routine until after such.
...and despite it being essentially a time period where the hospital leaves you alone, you still get billed for it.
Re: Immediate skin-to-skin contact with unstable newborns improves survival chances
#86I'm sceptical of single study medical research and especially that which involves the crazily political world of birth. It might be better to wait until the Cochrane collaboration does a meta analysis on multiple studies before anyone changes what they are currently doing.
Skin-to-skin for children has been studied for a few decades, and the consensus is strongly in its favor, after a pile of studies have all pointed in the same direction. This study isn't "skin to skin care is good." This study was aimed to answer the question, as contextualized, "We have established that skin-to-skin care for healthy children is good (pile of studies); for unhealthy children that have been stabilized…
> Otherwise, what you're actually saying is, "I'm skeptical of results that pop magazines and press releases have only surfaced to my attention once" - which is a shoddy mechanism for curating your knowledge.
At the risk of nitpicking, this seems like a good principle to follow? Like, assuming skeptical means "I won't instantly buy into this being as great as the pop magazine claims" rather than "I will strongly presuppose that this is untrue because it was in a pop magazine".
Re: Immediate skin-to-skin contact with unstable newborns improves survival chances
#87Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you have to pay to hold your newborn in the US? Land of the free indeed
Wait, you have to pay to have a baby in the US? The wealthiest country in the world cannot even pay for the birth of its own citizens? I can understand arguments for private healthcare etc....but making people pay to give birth is insane.
Re: Immediate skin-to-skin contact with unstable newborns improves survival chances
#88Earlier quoted context omitted.
...and despite it being essentially a time period where the hospital leaves you alone, you still get billed for it.
Well, the bed and room itself is a limited resource of the hospital and it's one of their expenses.
Re: Immediate skin-to-skin contact with unstable newborns improves survival chances
#89Reading about the history of child birth in the U.S. over the last century is messed up. No wonder we have such high mortality rates still.
I remember having to change hospitals in Boston because they were proud of the fact that 50% of the births were c-sections…
Re: Immediate skin-to-skin contact with unstable newborns improves survival chances
#90Interesting 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…
With both our sons the process was mostly handled by midwives including a lot of the pre and post natal checkups. The births were done naturally and immediately afterwards mum was given the baby to skin cuddle. They didn’t wash the baby and we were advised not to bath the baby for the first few days even.
Mum was also given the option of how long she wanted to stay in hospital (anything from 6 hours to 4 days if I recall).