Declined antibiotic for Group B & regretted it?

[beccatown]

I tested positive and my doctor gave me oral antibiotics a week before delivery and was retested (negative second time).

[KelseyH]

Originally Posted by Ellasundies And there are sick babies whose Mom's got the antibiotics because of the antibiotics. There are also dead babies irregardless (because??) of the antibiotics. This is one of the biggest problems with maternity care in this country. We have things that are routinely done by practitioners and if a women's needs/educated desires don't fit into those routines then she is labeled 'selfish' or 'ignorant' or whatever other bad name. A woman is not 'selfish' because she chooses a treatment option other then what the hospital does on a regular basis. Sorry I'm stepping off my soap box now.

ITA.

[hawkeyegirl2003]

I guess everyone has the right to their own viewpoint, but as a nurse I've seen babies die from GBS sepsis. GBS isn't a "nasty" bug for mom, but there is definite evidence out there to support intrapartum antibiotics because it is deadly to babies that contract it when they are exposed. Anyone has the right to refuse, though. I would personally never take that kind of risk with my child's life.

[steph410]

Originally Posted by redlichen I don't see how not wanting to have your baby react adversely to antibiotics, or to ensure that they are also receiving beneficial bacteria by declining the IV antibiotics is selfish. However, I know that overuse of antibiotics as a society is causing nasty super-bugs but abstaining from them feels the same as turning off the water while brushing your teeth -feels like a small thing to do in the grand scope of it all. Is avoiding them really going to make a difference? There is just too much information out there these days -it is paralyzing.

having a baby who gets thrush from antibiotics is really no comparison to a baby DYING from gbs. antiobiotics during labor is the only thing that has been proven to significantly lower the risk of baby getting gbs. i don't believe any of the other options mentioned here (hibiclens) are things a doctor would in good conscience recommend.

[Kiliki]

Originally Posted by hawkeyegirl2003 I guess everyone has the right to their own viewpoint, but as a nurse I've seen babies die from GBS sepsis. GBS isn't a "nasty" bug for mom, but there is definite evidence out there to support intrapartum antibiotics because it is deadly to babies that contract it when they are exposed. Anyone has the right to refuse, though. I would personally never take that kind of risk with my child's life.

Gbs is not always contracted to babies born to gbs + moms. And of the babies who have issues with it, a very small amount of those die. I, of course, feel terrible for any family who loses a baby, but I don't think blanketly pumping all gbs + moms full of abx, creating a whole different set of problems, is a good solution.

Originally Posted by steph410 having a baby who gets thrush from antibiotics is really no comparison to a baby DYING from gbs. antiobiotics during labor is the only thing that has been proven to significantly lower the risk of baby getting gbs. i don't believe any of the other options mentioned here (hibiclens) are things a doctor would in good conscience recommend.

The reason none of the other options are endorsed by the majority of ob's is not b.c they are ineffective. It's b.c big pharmaceutical companies will not research these things b.c there's not enough money in it for them. And also b.c there is a lot of pressure on main stream American doctors to conform to the norm.

I'm not a conspiracy theorist but I can see it pretty clearly that the way the current system is set up, pharmaceutical companies and insurance companies dictate what treatments a doctor is permitted to offer. So it's far from shocking to me that doctors are limited in the kinds of treatment they offer. It's the same reason a doctor will give a patient with chronic heartburn a script for prilosec, instead of advising them to change their diet, the same reason doctors give patients iv fluids instead of a few cups of water... inexpensive treatments are not ineffective, they're just not expensive enough to pad anyone's pocket, so no one "recommends" them....

MOST babies born to mothers who test positive for gbs will not become ill. One in 200 will. And of those, the mortality rate is 5-15%. So half a percent get ill, and of that half a percent 5-15% will die.

[Kiliki]

If my math is correct.... and I am not a math gal.... you're more likely to die in an accident than to have a baby that dies from gbs.

Odds of dying in a car wreck... roughly 1.2%
40,000 deaths each yr from car accidents on average in the US.

Odds of baby dying from gbs.... ranges roughly from 0.00032 percent to 0.00096 percent.
1000-3000 deaths per yr from gbs in the US.

Odds of being struck by lightning in your lifetime... 0.0001
Just for a little more perspective.

[doulamomma]

Didn't read the responses, but this is my standard answer I give for all gbs related questions lol
Tons of great info
http://www.gentlebirth.org/archives/gbs.html

Sent from my droid

[redlichen]

An excerpt found from the link left by doulamomma:

"Anyway, the first was my client. She was 41 weeks with her 3rd. Normal pregnancy. She called with the first sign of labor at 7:40 am and delivered at about 10:00 am. AROM about 5 min before delivery. The baby looked fine and I went home without a worry in the world about that babe.

At about 1:00 am ,the mom called, very worried. The baby was lethargic and difficult to rouse. I had her meet me at the hospital, and initially when I saw her, I felt like a dork, bringing a healthy baby in-- By this time she was awake. I didn't note any abnormalities in respirations, etc.etc, and the nurse didn't either. Then as we waited for the ped, she began to look bad. I don't remember all of the gory details of her symptoms, but I do remember that watching her go down was dramatic. She had some questionable symptoms by the time the ped came in, and her labs were bad. By that time, all you had to do was look at her to see she was in trouble. It took about 3 hours for the ped to decide to ship her. She was in NICU for 3 months, then back in and out for another few weeks with a strain of GBS that was resistant to any of the antibiotics they could come up with. She's fine, now.

[slingmama4]

I had my first son in the hospital 15 years ago and they didn't test for that. My second son, 12 years ago, I tested positive and refused treatment. Perfect and healthy, no problems.. My third son, 8 years ago, I tested positive, but we had a home birth, so no drugs were given. Perfect, happy, healthy and no problems. My last two were homebirths and i chose to not do testing. Perfect, happy, healthy and no problems.
Every mama has to make their own educated decision. I remember being full of fear from every thing the doctors said and things I read. Then, I did my own research and made the decision right for my family. We are preggers again and i will not be tested. I hope you are able to come to decision that you feel comfortable and at peace about.

[holly6737]

Count me into the group who has also seen babies die of GBS sepsis, one from a homebirth transport. I cultured out GBS with this pregnancy after a urine culture and I am happily taking the antibiotics.

That said, please do not shoot hibiclens up your vagina. I dont' know why people would think that antibiotics in labor would be BAD and yet shooting hibiclens up your vagina is GOOD. That's not going to do anything other than give you bacterial vaginosis. Again, do NOT shoot hibiclens up your vajayjay. It's a bad idea all the way around.