Vitamin K administration legal/ethical nightmare!

[IndigoCarmine]

Picture this: your pt shows up with a birthing plan that includes "no vaccines for baby, including Vitamin K" but you know that VitK is a state requirement. Period. Aside from it being hospital policy to administer it to every baby born, it is a state policy. You could actually leave yourself open to losing your license if you *didn't* give it. You are breaking the law by *not* giving it.

(nice, right?)

This policy and it's legal ramifications are on file in the nursing admin office (you know this because you called them ASAP!). As much as it stinks to get off on the wrong foot with your pt right off the bat, you inform the pt of the policy and the position you are in.

The family then whips out a letter supposedly written by a lawyer stating that they will sue if their baby gets Vitamin K.

(nice, right? I love it when patients show up to the hospital so incredibly prepared.)

NOW WHAT??

(tell me what you'd do and I'll tell you what happened )

[MIcrunchyRN]

I would tell you to **** right off if you told me you were going to interrupt my breastfeeding and bonding to administer a medication to my child in another room. FTR, I fully support the parents right to refuse vit K after being given the risks and benefits.

I can't believe that so many facilities still get away with mother-baby separation purely for staffing convenience. Those of you working in those facilities should be advocating for change in procedure. The benefits are so well documented.

In our birth plan that was followed the vitamin K was give while I was holding and bonding with baby AFTER he was 2 hours old. He was never taken from me except to get a weight and height... shot was done while he was on the boob.

As far as state law to give it... you can waiver it. Michigan has same law and you just sign a waiver saying you know risks etc. Like another poster said... the risk of a significant bleed from not getting vitamin K is less than 2 per state.. and the risk of leukemia also is less than 2 from it (per state) so refusing is putting your child at no more harm than recieving it.

[rnin02]

My hospital has a form parents can sign if they wish to decline the Vit K or the erythromycin ointment. That form becomes part of the chart. I don't bother arguing with them...what's the point? At this stage of the game, nothing I can say will change their minds...and I'm not going to try to change their minds unless there's an issue with the delivery...forceps, vacuum, etc. Or if they plan to circ without Vit K...that I might try to talk to them about:) But just because its "state required" doesn't mean they can't opt out, if they acknowledge the risk involved. Its their baby, not mine.