In a message dated 6/21/2003 9:32:24 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:

> Do parents (or even health care providers) really get it that a baby is
> only
> 4 days old on Day 5?  That the transition diapers we expect to see on Day 3
> or 4 should be happening when a baby is 2 or 3 days old?
>
>
Diane, I've mulled over this myself and then decided maybe I'm just too anal.
Day 1 could be called day of birth, then the 2nd day would be day 1. However,
if baby is born late in the evening, not much is left of day of birth. Maybe
the log could say first 24 hr., second 24 hr., etc. but I'm afraid this might
drive people nuts. Or is the present way of doing things OK? Are we getting
into problems due to the fuzzy nature of how old the baby really is? I very
specifically figure out exactly how old the baby is when I assess things like wt.
and output, but I'm not sure too many people get that exact. It must be the ex
NICU nurse in me (we measured things at times in nannograms to make sure the
tiniest babies were getting the proper amounts). I'll be interested in what
others think.

Kathy Boggs, RN, IBCLC
Mountain View, CA

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

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(TM)
mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html