[OzMW]

Originally Posted by cherokeesummer

I. That would be nice for some moms but like you said there are many that don't want fully room in. We have been told that its the future hope for our hospital but seriously, it will take a lot of trianing in the ob offices and in tours and what not b/c the majority of our patients do not want to room in and will bring baby to us all the time for smoking or for rest or whichever. Now I'm one to say I do tell a really tired mom if she is feeling super tired and would like rest but is holding off b/c she feels guilty, I have been known to say its ok, don't feel guilty, if you want to take the time to rest for a bit its ok. But most of the time its 70/30, seems 70 percent want baby in nursery and 30 percent want baby with them in room.
I'd be interested to see the rooming in come though.

Places all over the world have had these concerns over the years, it is NO EXCUSE! These kids should be with their mothers. Biohazard...eeeck! The bloody mother should be the only one whose picking the kid up anyway! What about the infection risk to all those kids stuck in newborn nurseries...yucko! We ditched our nursery years ago, and you know what, we coped! And sometimes we have kids who aren't bathed fro 24Hrs +. So what? If that bugs you, wear gloves.................

[GrumpyRN63]

[quote=IndigoCarmine;2864614

I support parents right to refusal, too, but they aren't allowed to refuse the K in NYS. That's the problem.[/quote]

So my question is what is the backlash to the parents ?? They can't refuse, so the hospital and nurse are held to an assault?? Sounds to me like too much liability for the nurse and hospital, if they do refuse does DCF come in, do the parents need a court order to withhold?? I'm sure this has come up before, there's a lot of granola crunching mom's in NYS , what has happened in the past ????? BTW, I like granola crunchers,I was a hippie in a previous life

[eden]

How can it be state requirement that a baby get vitamin K when parents have the right to make medical decisions regarding their children, icluding any and all vaccines? To the OP, is there a law on the books because if there's not then you cannot give the vit K without parental consent.

Don't get me wrong I think it's absurd to have a parent refuse but I know that I need their consent before I can give it at my facility and if they say no, I chart that it was declined and I have told them the risks of not having it.

I think I have only ever had one patient refuse it.

[morte]

Originally Posted by eden

How can it be state requirement that a baby get vitamin K when parents have the right to make medical decisions regarding their children, icluding any and all vaccines? To the OP, is there a law on the books because if there's not then you cannot give the vit K without parental consent.

Don't get me wrong I think it's absurd to have a parent refuse but I know that I need their consent before I can give it at my facility and if they say no, I chart that it was declined and I have told them the risks of not having it.

I think I have only ever had one patient refuse it.

Eden, click on the links provided by the OP, it is indeed a law in NY....

[IndigoCarmine]

Originally Posted by GrumpyRN63

So my question is what is the backlash to the parents ?? They can't refuse, so the hospital and nurse are held to an assault?? Sounds to me like too much liability for the nurse and hospital, if they do refuse does DCF come in, do the parents need a court order to withhold??

Unbelieveably, this happened again just yesterday. Yucky for everyone involved.

1. Took report on pt at 9cm refusing VitK. Not one but two pediatricians counseled the pt, and extensive notes were written by them and the nurse.

2. Since this was documented up the wahoo, and she was so close to delivering (and c/s bound and really stressed out), and it seemed like a closed case, I chose not to bring up the matter with the pt. again, but *did* inform my charge nurse since she didn't know about it. She, in turn, had to alert nursing supervisor who also hadn't known, and it was SO incredibly busy that she didn't arrive for two hours to discuss it with me; a full hour *after* the c/s, when the pt was in recovery with her baby and her family.

3. My charge nurse instructed me to write an incident report, which I expected. She wanted me to have both peds and the OB provider sign the report. The OB refused to sign it, so I had to document her refusal to sign the refusal, AND

4. the supervisor needed *me* to write yet another note documenting that the parents were informed that under NYS law they would be reported to social work and then SW would have to report them to the ACS and the hospital could not legally clear the baby for discharge without the express consent of children's services.

Talk about suck.

It's really very insane.
And it's about to get a whooooooole lot worse: http://snipurl.com/2ei19

[Jolie]

Welcome to the People's Republic of New York!

Is there a public outcry over this proposed legislation? I certainly hope so. I can't imagine turning over parental authority and decision-making to CPS based on flawed laws passed by ill-informed legislators.

[Nefertari1279]

Indigo:

Your right, that does suck!

I can't believe the parents were reported just for refusing a damn vaccine, its not like the parents were refusing live saving CPR!

And that article was just creepy . . .gee why don't we just throw out the Constitution and let the govt decide what is best for us "rolls eyes"

This kind of thing is just digusting! I hope NY's lawmakers pull their heads out of their rears and wake up to this tyranny, and put a stop to it! Another thing is, you just know that other states are watching this and who knows how many would try to pass simular laws. (Thus stripping parents their god-given rights to make medical decisions for their kids)

After all drug company lobbyists and state officals know more about what is best for your childern than you and your dr's right?

[Jolie]

[quote=Nefertari1279;2888207]Indigo:

Your right, that does suck!

I can't believe the parents were reported just for refusing a damn vaccine, its not like the parents were refusing live saving CPR! QUOTE]

I don't mean to nitpick, but I want to make one point clear. Vitamin K is not a vaccine. It is a medication administered to newborns to prevent an extremely rare complication of the neonatal period. Refusing vitamin K harms no one, with the possible exception of that individual infant. Hemorrhagic disease of the newborn is not contagious.

In my opinion, it is much like parents who opt to take a "watch and wait approach" to an infant who has been exposed to prolonged rupture of membranes. The baby presents with absolutely no s/s of infection, so the parents and pediatrician together decide to hold off on antibiotics. It is a reasonable decision that can be reversed in a heartbeat if the baby becomes symptommatic. How is that different than the parents who decide against "routine" and likely unnecessary vitamin K administration? Yet the parents who opt to watch and wait with their PROM baby are lauded for being conscientious about wanting to avoid unnecessary antibiotic use, while the parents who opt to watch and wait with vitamin K are reported to CPS and not allowed to take their baby home without State approval.

Sick.

[MarySunshine]

I agree with every Jolie has written about this situation -- don't touch that vitamin K and inform the administrator, charge nurse, and pediatrician. Document that situation. That's all you can do. That law is absurd and I don't blame those parents for having a letter from a lawyer.

[mommy2boysaz]

I am in Indiana and we have a fair number who decline the Vit. K and/or the Erythromycin eye oint. We have a form for them to sign stating that they are aware of the risks, etc., but that they decline anyways.
Hasn't been much of a big deal.