victoria1987
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2013
- Messages
- 332
- Reaction score
- 0
Warning, this is a big vent, but I would really love some help!
I would really love some help or advise particularly from Ontario mums. I am generally a moderate person and will do whatever medical interventions/tests procedures etc. are in the best interest of myself and my child if the benefits outweigh the risks. I have no issues with most of the scheduled vaccines, attend all my prenatal appointments and undergo whatever testing is prescribed and am choosing to give the vit k injection at birth and PKU screening. However, the one thing that I DO NOT want is the administration of antibiotic ointment to my newborn's eyes.
I have done the research and this ointment protects against the transmission of gonorrhea and chlamydia from the mother. As I am a responsible person I take care to monitor my own sexual health and undergo regular STI screenings even though I am a married woman in a monogamous relationship. I have documentation showing that I am clean of both of these infections as recently as July 2013 and would be willing to be screened again if need be. There is absolutely no reason for my child to have this ointment! I do not like the side effects, the overly liberal use of antibiotics or the use of this on my minutes old child for no reason compounded with the fact that I personally am very allergic to erythromycin (the drug used) meaning that it would be risky for me to even TOUCH my baby and the chances that he may also be allergic are increased. YET I have discovered that this is one of the very few medical procedures in the province of Ontario that is required by law!!
I am fuming mad and offended. In this province I have the option to choose whether to vaccinate my child, whether to administer vit k, and even to withhold life saving medical procedures (such as blood transfustion) on religious grounds, yet I cannot decline a treatment that is ABSOLUTELY unnecessary for my child (with me being STI free) even though it may endanger myself or my baby due to previous allergic reactions not to mention interrupt the crucial first hour or so of baby's alertness possibly interfering with bonding and breastfeeding establishment!
I am really sorry that this is so long and "venty" but I am outraged. I am not a neglectful parent and happily consent to medically necessary treatments for me and my baby. THIS IS NOT ONE OF THEM, yet I have no choice! Can any mums from Ontario tell me any more info about this? Is there any way around it at all? Can I get a lawyer? Is this just policy "on the books" but up to my individual midwife. Anyone from Ont. not get the ointment? Gosh I am just so mad!
I would really love some help or advise particularly from Ontario mums. I am generally a moderate person and will do whatever medical interventions/tests procedures etc. are in the best interest of myself and my child if the benefits outweigh the risks. I have no issues with most of the scheduled vaccines, attend all my prenatal appointments and undergo whatever testing is prescribed and am choosing to give the vit k injection at birth and PKU screening. However, the one thing that I DO NOT want is the administration of antibiotic ointment to my newborn's eyes.
I have done the research and this ointment protects against the transmission of gonorrhea and chlamydia from the mother. As I am a responsible person I take care to monitor my own sexual health and undergo regular STI screenings even though I am a married woman in a monogamous relationship. I have documentation showing that I am clean of both of these infections as recently as July 2013 and would be willing to be screened again if need be. There is absolutely no reason for my child to have this ointment! I do not like the side effects, the overly liberal use of antibiotics or the use of this on my minutes old child for no reason compounded with the fact that I personally am very allergic to erythromycin (the drug used) meaning that it would be risky for me to even TOUCH my baby and the chances that he may also be allergic are increased. YET I have discovered that this is one of the very few medical procedures in the province of Ontario that is required by law!!
I am fuming mad and offended. In this province I have the option to choose whether to vaccinate my child, whether to administer vit k, and even to withhold life saving medical procedures (such as blood transfustion) on religious grounds, yet I cannot decline a treatment that is ABSOLUTELY unnecessary for my child (with me being STI free) even though it may endanger myself or my baby due to previous allergic reactions not to mention interrupt the crucial first hour or so of baby's alertness possibly interfering with bonding and breastfeeding establishment!
I am really sorry that this is so long and "venty" but I am outraged. I am not a neglectful parent and happily consent to medically necessary treatments for me and my baby. THIS IS NOT ONE OF THEM, yet I have no choice! Can any mums from Ontario tell me any more info about this? Is there any way around it at all? Can I get a lawyer? Is this just policy "on the books" but up to my individual midwife. Anyone from Ont. not get the ointment? Gosh I am just so mad!