(Closed) Lotus birth (?!)

posted 7 years ago in Pregnancy
Post # 32
Member
887 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: June 2013

@samanthapearson:  whoops, didn’t see your post, that answers the questions I had about how this doesn’t transmit infection to the baby, thanks. My remaining question is, is there any proven or suspected physiological / biological benefit to the baby from doing this? Or is it more of a spiritual thing?

Also, you say that the placenta ‘belongs to the baby’ but that’s not really true – the most fascinating thing about the placenta, in my opinion anyway, is that it is the only organ that is ever made from cells belonging to 2 separate people – the mother’s uterine tissue creates the maternal placenta, and the baby’s cells create the fetal placenta. These 2 layers grow together to create the organ. Even more interesting is that the placenta is the front line of a biological struggle between the mother and baby. While it seems like it should be such a harmonious thing, a mother’s body nurturing her unborn baby’s, the mother and baby’s interests are fundamentally at odds. It’s in the baby’s best interest to take as much from the mother as possible. It’s in the mother’s best interest to be conservative in how much she allows the baby to take from her, conserving nutrients and stores for future pregnancies. To this end the blood vessels composed of maternal cells at times work to constrict, limiting blood flow, and the blood vessels made of fetal cells work to dilate. 

Random biology lesson, sorry – I’m just really interested in placentas! Now I’m going to read more about this instead of doing actual work… 

Post # 33
Member
95 posts
Worker bee
  • Wedding: September 2006

@araneidae:  Let us know what else you find out.

Post # 35
Member
3 posts
Wannabee
  • Wedding: June 1992

@araneidae:  You are right about the placenta.

As for infection avoiding infection is one of the benefits of Lotus Birthing.  Cord stumps go rotten all the time.  An unsevered cord doesn’t.  Even in the cases I mentioned above when the placenta wasn’t tended and rotted, while unpleasant for all, this posed no risk to the babies as there is on way infection could travel along a dehydrated umbillical cord.  So

For mor info on Lotus Birth and the dangers of early cord clamping google Dr Sarah Buckley.

Post # 36
Member
2192 posts
Buzzing bee
  • Wedding: May 2012

@samanthapearson:  Thank you for educating us all on Lotus Birth.  As I am due with my 2nd in August and it has been 15 years since my first I know this birth will be a lot different than my first.  Interesting notion to think of, lotus birth.

Post # 37
Member
887 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: June 2013

@samanthapearson:  Thanks for the info. I am certainly looking into delayed cord clamping as it just makes intuitive sense to me that more blood for the baby should be better. For me, lotus birth would be taking things a bit far and I think that delayed clamping would suffice. 

Have you read anything that counters the notion that delaying clamping could actually cause problems for the baby due to receiving too much blood? I’ve encountered this argument and I’m still figuring it out for myself. I’m not sure which is better. 

Post # 38
Member
268 posts
Helper bee
  • Wedding: November 1999

@araneidae:  

I haven’t done any research on this, but it would seem to me that since the placenta doesn’t have it’s own method to maintain blood pressure that delaying cord cutting wouldn’t provide more blood to the baby.  I suppose in the moments after birth and before the placenta is birthed there might be some transfer, but even that seems unlikely to me.  Wouldn’t the baby’s heart be pumping and the blood pressure in the placenta be relatively low in comparison?  I suppose the only way I see it being useful is if the baby’s blood pressure drops, and even then there would need to be some pressure from the placenta side for it to transfer.

Post # 39
Member
887 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: June 2013

@terisa2012:  I’m pretty sure the whole point of delayed cord clamping is so that more blood gets to the baby. The cord continues to pulse for a while after birth, and this (I think) pumps a lot of the blood from the placenta into the baby. The baby has to be held at the same level as, or lower than, the mother / the placenta in order for this to happen. The other option is to cut the cord right away and donate the cord blood (or pay to store it for your baby should s/he ever need it). Or I guess it just gets thrown out, but that seems like a real waste. Initially when I was reading into it it made a lot of sense to get that extra blood to the baby, but then I found some studies suggseting that the baby getting too much blood as a result of delayed clamping could have negative effects. I haven’t done a ton of reading into this yet though, as I’m only 4 months pregnant.

Post # 40
Member
2142 posts
Buzzing bee
  • Wedding: October 2015

I remember learning about this in one of my developmental psych classes- there is benefit to it, but if I remember correctly you only need to delay cutting the cord by like 5 minutes, not a week.

Post # 41
Member
3 posts
Wannabee
  • Wedding: June 1992

There is no recorded harm done to any baby as the result of a Lotus Birth.  The extra blood can cause the baby to have phisiological neonatal jaundice..this is normal…it rectifies on it’s own within a few days.

Yes, one of the benefits of LB is that baby gets their full transfusion of blood and important stem cells.  These links can explain it better than I can.

Nicholas Fogelson (http://www.academicobgyn) discusses the physiologic and clinical impacts of delayed umbilical cord clamping in human birth.

Birth Injuries Related to Umbilical Cord Clamping:

http://www.cordclamp.org/

 

The topic ‘Lotus birth (?!)’ is closed to new replies.

Find Amazing Vendors