# Delayed Cord Clamping?



## Connah'sMommy

What are the benefits of this?

Im seeing my MW on tuesday and we are going through my preferences for labour/birth etc and Im thinking of asking about this.

:flower:


----------



## mamawannabee

From what I understand, it allows all the blood of the cord to get to baby, giving it the maximum amount of nutrients and blood possible. It also gives it the oxygen still so there is less of a chance of baby needing oxygen treatment soon after birth. I'm still researching it, so I hope other women will be able to give you better/more thorough answers!


----------



## fides

wss^

plus, from what i've read, at birth, a fifth to a third of the baby's blood is still in the placenta, so if you clamp it right away, the baby has to remake all of that blood. Allowing the cord to stop pulsing allows the baby more time to switch from receiving oxygen from the cord to oxygen from the air, and allows the baby to have higher levels of iron.


----------



## moomin_troll

basicaly what the ladies above have said. the one main benifit is that they get all of their blood.

to have delayed cord clamping u cant have the injection to speed the process along as that closes the cervix. but after the cord has stopped pulsating u can them clamp cut wait wait for ur body to release the placenta (bf helps) or u can have the injection after.

but for me the injection was awful, i wasnt warned that it can make u really sick and dizzy! i looked like death because of that thing and felt like it too


----------



## Guppy051708

I say, hands down, delayed cord clamping is the way to go. And in the event that baby needs cut off, just wait as long as possible. In my experience delayed cord blood clamping leads to a less risk of jaundice, baby anemia (low white blood cell count), and hypoglycemia in the baby (low sugars). I dont have research to back that up (though im sure its out there), but this has been the experience of everyone i know who waited to clamp and cut.I highly recommend it!


----------



## Samantha675

This link has a pretty quick run down, and includes the studies or original source.

https://www.extraordinarytherapies.com.au/Cord Clamping Information.pdf

Amazingly, Darwin recommended delayed cord clamping way back when.


----------



## Guppy051708

Samantha675 said:


> Amazingly, Darwin recommended delayed cord clamping way back when.

It makes impeccable sense! I dont understand why OBs are in such a rush (usually MWs encourage delayed clamping). It really is much more beneficial. And i also read somewhere (sorry cant remember the source) that things like autism and other physical/mental problems are greatly decreased. Well more like there is a correlation between the two (not that is correlation means causation, but you catch my drift) It makes sense when you think about all of those fetal cells and how they can turn into anything and the baby is actually getting all of it.


----------



## moomin_troll

while i agree with how good it is to delay clamping (my mw was in a rush to get everything over and done with so clamped before i could even think) 

i dont like it when things like autisum are linked to things like this without actual proof.


----------



## Guppy051708

I didn't mean for this to be an autism debate. Sorry.
I do find it interesting, a friend of mine has a child with autism. In the US they will not transfer stem cells as therapy for autism. She went outside of the US (twice) but had US doctors do a stem cell transfer. Since then he has had remarkable improvements. Remeber, these are the same stem cells people are using to fight health problems and other developmental issues. Thus it would make sense that a baby recieving these same stem cells-fully at birth, would have less chance of lots of things. Once again, just a correlation as no prove of causation. Big difference, but worth it for a "pro", IMO.


----------



## moomin_troll

Guppy051708 said:


> I didn't mean for this to be an autism debate. Sorry.

i didnt mean for it to come across that i was going to start something, its a very touchy subject for me and recently so many things have been blaimed for autisum like its such a terrible thing to have drives me abit crazy.


going back to cord clamping, my doula is making me a silk tie to clamp the cord instead of having the horrible plastic clamps as they can rub. i think its a great idea and cant wait to see the silk clamp


----------



## Guppy051708

moomin_troll said:


> Guppy051708 said:
> 
> 
> I didn't mean for this to be an autism debate. Sorry.
> 
> i didnt mean for it to come across that i was going to start something, its a very touchy subject for me and recently so many things have been blaimed for autisum like its such a terrible thing to have drives me abit crazy.Click to expand...

Sorry hun. I wasn't saying that as a negative thing, but i do think people want answers and stuff. I just wanted to let you know that i graduated with a bachelors in rehabilitation services and I worked with children with Autism, PDD-NOS for over a year. i loved that job (unfortunatly we relocated), but anyways, i just want you to know that i didn't mean any negativity towards that :hugs:


----------



## sarah1980

moomin_troll said:


> going back to cord clamping, my doula is making me a silk tie to clamp the cord instead of having the horrible plastic clamps as they can rub. i think its a great idea and cant wait to see the silk clamp

Oh that sounds lovely!



To the OP, I believe another benefit of delayed cord clamping is that if all the blood flows into the baby then its not in the placenta which, in theory, should make the placenta easier to pass when the time comes. 

Think of it as an inflated balloon with all that blood in it and a deflated balloon without.......

Sarah.xxx


----------



## Guppy051708

^ thats a good point! I never thought of that!

In some cultures, the mom never cuts the cord. She delivers the placenta and she wrps the baby up with everything until it falls of naturally. Sounds a little gross, but it is interesting!


----------



## moomin_troll

Guppy051708 said:


> ^ thats a good point! I never thought of that!
> 
> In some cultures, the mom never cuts the cord. She delivers the placenta and she wrps the baby up with everything until it falls of naturally. Sounds a little gross, but it is interesting!

its called a lotus birth, not for everyone and i dont quiet fancy it myself. i no there was a woman on here awhile back who did it. 

theres never been any proven benifit from doing it but like u said it can be a culture thing.

after pushing a baby out i cant say ididnt even noticed the placenta coming out hahaha well my mw pulled it out which felt horrible.

after i had zane i went to the loo and felt a strange feeling and a huge clot just fell out, i was gutted that something that big could fall out hahaha


----------



## Guppy051708

moomin_troll said:


> after pushing a baby out i cant say ididnt even noticed the placenta coming out hahaha well my mw pulled it out which felt horrible.
> 
> after i had zane i went to the loo and felt a strange feeling and a huge clot just fell out, i was gutted that something that big could fall out hahaha

I had the same exact thing happen so i freaked a little bc i thought that meant i retained the placenta (which causes a ton of problem) but when i told the nurse it wasn't a big deal. But dang! i was not expecting something that size to fall out! :shock: :haha:


----------



## moomin_troll

my mum has huge clots so i was expecting it because she told me about it happening to her, if she hadnt of told me id of thought it was a second baby lol the thing was the size of zanes head.
i was annoyed that mws dont tell women about things like that happening because even tho i knew it was ok i still screamed hahaha

god why am i having another baby? lol


----------



## Guppy051708

:rofl: because you are nuts just like me! :rofl: jk


----------



## Connah'sMommy

Thanks for all the great info ladies, This is definately something Ill be doing all being well :thumbup:

Just to get something clear though, i can have the injection once the cord is finally cut? Iv heard horor stories about some ladies who have declined the injection and bled quite alot....i know i prob shouldnt be listening to the horor stories but it still makes me wonder iykwim?

xx


----------



## moomin_troll

yes u can have the injection any time u want it, if u want it.

i had the injection and i lost alot of blood so really its hit and miss. i say keep a open mind and see how u feel once the cord is still pulsating as to if u feel u need the injection


----------



## Guppy051708

yup, you can have it afterwords.
Make sure you keep taking your prenatal! I stopped taking it and i ended with severe anemia and PICA. We didn't know this going into labor. I needed the injection as i was bleeding bad from being anemic. It was over something so easily fixed, this time i learned my lesson! Not all women need the injection though!!! Your doc/mw will know based on bloodloss if you need it or not, so if you dont want it, and everything is looking fine you dont have to get it! i am certain she will tell you if you need it though :D its pretty routine, but it doesn't have to be


----------



## Eternal

i had in my birth plan to delay cutting, you need to either not have the injection or delay it which can cause heavier bleeding, but everyone is different. My birth plan was all natural and i wanted a natural stage three unless there was an expended time (like over an hour) when i still havent delivered, although its quite normal for this to the case. 

Anyway, in my case it didnt happen, i had to be transfered to hospital (from birth centre) and because my son had decreasing heart rate and myconium they needed to take him away for a little help when he was born, I was already pre-warned that he would need to be taken away so agreed to have the injection and clamp the cord quickly. 

I wont be doing it this time as its twins, although if it were a single baby i would prob try again. :D


----------



## sarah1980

Connah'sMommy said:


> Thanks for all the great info ladies, This is definately something Ill be doing all being well :thumbup:
> 
> Just to get something clear though, i can have the injection once the cord is finally cut? Iv heard horor stories about some ladies who have declined the injection and bled quite alot....i know i prob shouldnt be listening to the horor stories but it still makes me wonder iykwim?
> 
> xx

I discussed this with my mw last week and she said "generally" she has found that ladies that don't have the injection bleed alot at the time of delivery then tend to have less bleeding in the weeks following delivery and that ladies that do have the injection bleed less at the time and more in the following weeks. This is just her observation though, I haven't researched it to see if there's anything to back it up. 

She also said that when she delivers ladies that are looking to have a physiological third stage they can have the injection at any time so she gives the placenta time to come out on it's own but if she has any concerns she advises the lady that having the injection may be a good idea then takes it from there.

Hope that helps,

Sarah :flower:


----------



## Guppy051708

I found this VERY interesting article!!!! Love it. Basically what they describe happened to me (about having a water birth) you will see it. make sure you read it :D

https://midwifethinking.com/2010/08/26/the-placenta-essential-resuscitation-equipment/


----------



## xSamanthax

I was recently thinking about this, still haven't made my mind up yet though


----------



## sarah1980

Guppy051708 said:


> I found this VERY interesting article!!!! Love it. Basically what they describe happened to me (about having a water birth) you will see it. make sure you read it :D
> 
> https://midwifethinking.com/2010/08/26/the-placenta-essential-resuscitation-equipment/

:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:

VERY interesting, thanks for sharing! I hope the midwives are co operative if I find myself in a similar situation.

Sarah :flower:


----------



## moodle

Connah'sMommy said:


> Thanks for all the great info ladies, This is definately something Ill be doing all being well :thumbup:
> 
> Just to get something clear though, i can have the injection once the cord is finally cut? Iv heard horor stories about some ladies who have declined the injection and bled quite alot....i know i prob shouldnt be listening to the horor stories but it still makes me wonder iykwim?
> 
> xx

You may find this article helpful...

Further thoughts on the third stage
Sara Wickham

Taken from www.withwoman.co.uk

The third stage of labour has, for some time, been one of the hottest clinical topics in midwifery. Although both of the major research studies (1, 2) which have been carried out to compare the physiological birth of the placenta with active management suggest that the latter leads to less blood loss and 'better' outcomes, their findings have been challenged by many.

One of those taking issue with the research is Michel Odent, who suggests that it is impossible to compare the two types of management of the third stage without first understanding the positive steps we can take to facilitate physiological third stage (3). I would like to add another observation to this debate; the amount of blood loss in the hours following birth, which I believe may account for the differences reported in the above studies. 

My observations arise from a time when I worked on a hospital postnatal ward, where women were admitted from the labour ward a couple of hours after they had given birth. Most of these women had had their third stages actively managed, and their recorded blood loss after the birth was usually around 100-200 ml. I would generally help these women to the bathroom the first time they felt they wanted to get up. Invariably, as I waited outside, women would call me in to inspect blood or clots which they had passed into the toilet or bedpan; they were often concerned about how much blood they had lost. Sometimes almost as much lochia was passed at this point as at the birth itself. Although I reassured the women that this was normal and there was no problem, the pattern started me thinking. 

I realised that their blood loss was probably more noticeable to me because I had previously been practising in a situation in which the majority of women chose physiological third stage. After a physiological third stage, the women did not have the pattern of heavy bleeding delayed for a few hours after the birth that I was observing in the women who had had active management in the hospital.

It struck me that this might account for the different amounts of blood lost between women who had physiological and managed third stage. Could the use of an oxytocic inhibit the normal blood loss at birth, but cause the blood to be somehow retained by the woman's body and expelled later? This would account both for the difference in recorded blood loss at birth and the later loss of blood in women experiencing active management.

Physiologically, this would make sense. The use of an oxytocic drug causes a strong and sustained contraction of the uterus. The uterus is too well contracted to release a large amount of blood at this stage, which is why the blood loss is small in most cases. This is seen by many as a good thing, and cited as one of the advantages of using oxytocics in the third stage.

However, if the woman's body is physiologically adapted to losing more blood, it wouldn't be until the effects of the oxytocic had started to wear off that the uterus would be able to relax sufficiently to achieve this. So it may be that the average amount of blood lost during physiological third stage is normal, while the lesser amounts of blood lost during active management are abnormally low. If we recorded the amount of lochia lost in the first few hours after birth together with that lost during the birth itself, would the figures for the two types of third stage correlate more closely? Could it be that the total blood loss in women experiencing active management might actually be higher?

We also know that the administration of exogenous oxytocin inhibits the body's own production of endogenous oxytocin (4) which may be another factor in explaining this later blood loss. The effects of the oxytocic drug wear off before a woman's body has time to increase its own supplies of oxytocin to compensate. All midwives are aware of the need to consider the continuation of syntocinon for a while after the birth, because the woman's body may not be able to produce enough oxytocin to keep her uterus contracted. Does the same type of process happen when oxytocics are used in the third stage?

When comparing the outcomes of the two types of third stage, we tend to assume that less is better. But could it be that, for some women, the use of an oxytocic somehow inhibits the normal bleeding which is meant to occur at birth? Does this account for the slightly higher blood losses in women having physiological third stage? Why is it that, simply because women choosing physiological third stage may have higher blood loss initially, this is automatically viewed as pathological, when we may be causing the real pathology by our intervention in the process? We know that women's blood volumes increase during pregnancy, and some of this blood clearly needs to be released by the body in the first days and weeks after the birth.

Of course there are other issues; we need to understand more about how the third stage works physiologically and ensure we are employing the positive intercessions which assist this before attempting to compare physiological with active management. We need to be very clear about when the amount of blood loss is normal and when it becomes pathological; we also need to reflect upon what the causes of any truly pathological blood loss might be. 

There are myriad aspects of the third stage which midwives need to consider and debate. Perhaps mine is an unusual experience, and others could add to these thoughts. The evidence which relates to this area needs to come from all sources; from midwives' experience and understanding of physiology as well as research trials. Whatever the answers may be, we do not yet have a complete enough picture for us to be able to fully inform the women we work with. And it is they who need to make the final decision about how their third stage will occur.


1.	Prendeville W, Harding J, Elbourne D, et al. The Bristol third stage trial: active versus physiological management of the third stage of labour. BMJ 1988; 297:1295-1300. 

2.	Rogers J, Wood J, McCandish R, et al. Active versus expectant management of third stage of labour: the Hinchingbrooke randomised controlled trial. Lancet 1998; 351:693-699. 

3.	Odent M. Don't manage the third stage of labour! The Practising Midwife 1998; 1(9):31-33.

Robertson A. The pain of labor. Midwifery Today 1997; 39: 19Ð21, 40-42.


----------



## moodle

And some videos too

https://academicobgyn.com/2011/01/30/delayed-cord-clamping-grand-rounds/


----------

