gonneke van veldhuizen <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

  What I would like to see is any wel researched literature that will
convince me of the real bad hazards of a wet or dry not-bathed baby...

Why trying to prove the normal, better prove that the intervention is save
and benefitial. For the newborn child, that is.

Warmly,

Gonneke

IBCLC. LLLL, MOM in southern Netherlands

 

Some of us were talking at work about how 20-some years ago the nurses at
our hospital never wore gloves to handle newborns.   I attended many high
risk deliveries for our Level 3 NICU and the doctors would wear sterile
gloves to resuscitate the baby, but the nurses wouldn't wear ANY.  I don't
know if it was some sort of "macho" thing or what! :-)  Several of us were
saying how we would get home from work and realize that we still had blood
under our fingernails!!  That would never happen now, and that's surely a
good thing, but it's funny how our mindsets change.  I wouldn't handle an
unbathed newborn without gloves now, but I don't think the initial bath
should be rushed just for that reason.

 

Melinda Lueck, RN BSN IBCLC

Perrysburg, Ohio USA

 


             ***********************************************

To temporarily stop your subscription: set lactnet nomail
To start it again: set lactnet mail (or digest)
To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet
All commands go to [log in to unmask]

The LACTNET mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software together with L-Soft's LSMTP(R)
mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html