Re: OT: Would You Take Rhogam After Birth?

[Guest guest]

I read somewhere quite a while ago that the rejection issue only occurs

after the *second* child with an incompatible blood type and only if there's

backwash (for lack of a better word coming to me ATM) from the first child

during birth. I don't recall where though so don't take my word for it: but

hopefully it is somewhere to start.

-Lana

" There is nothing more useful than sun and salt. " - Latin proverb

On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 3:47 PM, penciloid <hoppythetoad@...> wrote:

> My first child has A- blood, so thankfully Rhogram wasn't an issue.

> I'm 13 weeks pregnant with number two, so it's time to start looking

> into this issue again. My midwife has 10 children and she took it

> (only after the birth). She recommends it after birth, if necessary,

> despite it being a blood product with aluminum or whatever garbage is

> in it these days. (She once had a patient who became sensitized and

> the baby needed a transfusion.)

>

> She understands my concerns and agrees it's less necessary with a

> gentle birth. However, in her opinion, the risk of disease or problems

> from the preservatives is worth taking, especially if a patient may

> decide to have a large family.

>

> Any thoughts? To me, it seems hard to believe that God would design us

> in a way that would require Rhogam shots to protect future babies. On

> the other hand, when a mother becomes sensitized, future babies suffer.

>