[back] Cord Clamping

CBC Story April 9 2001



        Please do a follow-up on CBC's Peter Mansbridge's story, April 9, 2001, CBC tv news, about the sick child, so pale, with leukemia, deprived of his cord blood at the time of birth, now getting it back, 9 months later, after it is very sick.  No wonder?  

        You would be too if you lost 20 to 50 percent of your blood or more of your blood at the time of your birth. . . deprived unnecessarily by the evil medical malpractice of immediate cord clamping?  Why is this being concealed from the public. I ask if this child was made sick by the fact his mother permitted immediate cord clamping, that probably deprived this infant of white cells that fight infections, and red cells that carry oxygen to all cells and organs.  

        It is a fact that cord blood banks are receiving for their stem cell research up to 200 cc's of a child's blood.  If that was taken from a 9 pound infant and it should have had 10 ounces of blood inside its body by the fact of blood transfused into it for about 7 minutes at the time of its birth, it would have been deprived of over 80 percent of its blood.   No wonder these children are getting leukemia's.. . 9 months later.

        If you want more medical facts, I can send them to you.  But why are you not investigating immediate cord clamping of the pulsating cord, during third stage labour and concealing the risk of harm to the infant.  This is a violation of rights to the infant, the owner of the cord blood, the baby.   No one, not even the mother, has legal rights to deprive the infant of its own blood, at its time of birth.   Not without a Court authorizing when the baby can be endangered.

        DNA confirms the cord blood in the placenta to be the infant's, not the mothers, and the placenta cells to be also confirmed the organ belongs to the infant, not the mother.

        The rights of deprivation are a criminal assault on the infant and certainly civil consequences to the doctor and nurse and hospital, permitting criminal medical practice to take place, must be dealt with in due process of law.   This involves the criminal act of medical malpractice.  

        Get the facts.   If the cord clamping on a pulsating cord is good medicine, why are there no videos on this procedure?  Or, the evidence of syringing out how much blood was deprived the infant, that was blocked inside the cord and placenta?   What are the readings of volume of blood inside the infant and what should have been inside the infant, but left outside by the process of immediate cord clamping?

        Nature designed the cord and placenta to give that blood to the infant, for up to even 15 minutes. . . after its birth, and after it has expanded its lungs to take in air, it needs the blood then, from the placenta, to lubricate the lungs, that did not need the blood, while the infant was not breathing air, inside the womb.  But the lungs need the blood transfusion by the pulsating cord at the time of birth. . . and the bones need the blood, white cells to fight infection, and red cells to carry oxygen to all parts of cells and organs.  

        This must be allowed the child,  at the time of the child's birth.  Nature knows what it is doing.  Man does not.   He is just experimenting with another person's child, and criminally, so.   No wonder the child needs its blood back. . . but 9 months late!   Really???!!!

Story requested on this by:Donna Young, Box 504, Dawson Creek, BC  V1G 4H4

tel/Fax:  250-782-9223 email:  dyoung@pris.bc.ca

NOTE:   While repeated requests have gone to CBC, they have stood with only supporting cord stem research, knowing the blood is coming from newborn infants, and that many while looking apparently healthy can be experiencing learning disabilities and other health problems, that if investigated will have their roots of a common denominators, drugs given the mother during birth and followed with immediate cord clamping.   No choices of natural birth in a hospital were offered, choice of positions, water births, for a drugless birth, and no options given the mother for no clamping or cutting the infant's umbilical cord ever, even in a hospital, where babies should be protected.  The Lotus birth is the only way to go, if all babies are to be protected equally, and not exploited for their blood.

    The government control over CBC has prevented even the CBC's Ombudsman of having the requirement of the truth of CBC's support for taking baby's blood at birth challenged publicly, that baby's while many do live from the criminal assault, are weakened, as is likely the evidence of this baby, and the fact that CBC did not release how much of the blood was deprived the child, that he was struggling to make back the red cells deprived his body, at birth.  My guess would be the child was deprived 6 ounces of blood, about 150 to 200 ccs. The CBC could have used a Court Order to Release the facts of this story that was released on their News, or NOT released it as intentionally deceiving the public this was a good practice, by stating the facts, of the amount of blood deprivation.   They deliberately concealed and have misled the public of such needed facts.   They failed to report this matter for Family Services Investigation, whether or NOT the mother as well as the doctors and nurses involved in the deprivation of blood should be before both criminal and civil courts. The duty is to the child that it is vindicated, not only by correction of its loss and suffering in its weakened state, but that no other children are so violated at birth, contrary to natural needs of the blood to have been transfused into the baby, by its own means to have done so.

From the Web Site:   www.123babybirth.com                    Email comments to:    donna@123babybirth.com