Just wondering how many expectant moms are considering private cord blood banking?

Tags: banking, blood, cord

Views: 28

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

One way to make a difference and allow everyone to be able to do this is by Supporting the Family Cord Blood Banking Act! a new federal bill that would allow parents to use pre-tax dollars to pay for cord blood stem cells.
More on this....http://blog.cordblood.com/archive/2009/06/04/every-voice-counts-sup....
To say that there has been no public funding of stem cell research for the past 8 years isn't true. There was no public funding of EMBRYONIC stem cell research for the past 8 years, but there WAS public funding of stem cell research when the stem cells came from sources other than aborted babies. Besides, there has been absolutely no evidence of any benefit or use for embryonic stem cells. Even Michael J. Fox - who has a vested interest in stem cell research - was on Oprah recently stating that fact. They have only found success in using cord blood stem cells or adult stem cells.

Empowered Mommy said:
The decision to bank private is very personal and for sure no one should be made to feel guilty. But you can't blame private companies for making a profit (they have been the ones puring money into research considering that in the past 8 years there has been no public funding directed at stem cell research. So they did to be able to pay for the research they're doing.

We read up on it alot and asked our primary care doctor and OB-gyn and decided to bank with our pregnancy. Neither doctor had a monetary incentive to recommend any particular company. They mentioned public banking but the risk was that the cells would not be available for our family’s use or that our hospital wouldn't be able to support this.

They recommended Cord Blood Registry or Viacord (both are good). But we decided to go with CBR because I found a discount coupon online for it. I used it when I enrolled online M1998 and got $250 Off the fees.
Total came out to $1,900 (including the one-time registration, specimen shipment and first year storage). To us it was worth it. We don’t spend on fancy vacations, expensive cars or house remodeling.
If you have actually observed TMTC births, then you should know that the cord has to be clamped immediately for a donation to occur. Now, I am not talking about cutting the cord, I am talking about clamping it. The actual cutting of the cord can occur at anytime. It is standard practice in hospital births to immediately clamp the cord, which stops the flow of the blood to the newborn. If the cord is not clamped, the blood will flow back into the newborn as it should, however, there will not be enough blood left in the cord for donation. It is actually difficult to obtain enough blood from the cord for the specified amount required for donation, which is why only 25% of donations actually get banked.

No, it does not take one to three hours for the cord to stop pulsating. It takes on average several minutes. There have been instances of pulsating taking up to 20 minutes.

The collection does not take place in another area; it takes place immediately following the delivery of the infant before the placenta has even been delivered. It is not necessary to cut the cord for a donation, only clamp it. If it is waited until a later time to collect the cord blood when say the placenta and cord are just sitting in a small container on the physician's instrument table, there will not be blood in the cord, it will have flowed out into the container. It doesn't automatically just sit in the cord; it is meant to flow somewhere. This can be observed by anyone; when the baby is first birthed, the cord attached to the newborn is fat and obviously filled with blood as you can see the large vein running throughit. Later, after the placenta and cord has been sitting out awhile, the cord is thin and white as all the blood has been drained out.

I am thoroughly stocked that you wouldn't know the procedures for collecting cord blood if you have actually been to many births.

Maureen Stevens said:
The research in this area is very clear.

It can take up to one and half to three hours for pulsing at the umbilical base to completely disappear...Could you post that research?

A recent (2009) Cochrane Review …Early versus delayed umbilical cord clamping in preterm infants studied the effects of the timing of umbilical cord clamping in hospitals. In the review of studies on babies born prematurely, delaying cord clamping for just a very short time helped some of the baby's blood from the placenta pass to the baby to help the flow of blood to the baby's lungs. Term infants whose cord clamping occurred later than 60 seconds after birth had a statistically higher risk of neonatal jaundice requiring phototherapy.

There is a lot of wrong information out there on private websites. Having observed public cord banking at numerous births (TMTC) the cord is not cut immediately, but at the couples discretion and the father/SO cuts the cord if desired and after delivery of the placenta the collection takes place in another area....cord blood is collected from the placenta… because umbilical cord blood or cord blood is the blood that stays in the umbilical cord and placenta after the birth of an infant.


Kathryn Blitz said:
Maureen said,
"The cord blood is collected after the baby is born and the umbilical cord is clamped and cut, it does not affect the baby or the birth experience and does not alter routine practice for the timing of umbilical cord clamping.

The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) encourages families to donate their newborn’s cord blood, which is normally discarded at birth, to public cord blood banks for use by other individuals in need."

This is incorrect. Donating a baby's cord blood absolutely affects the baby as it deprives the baby of up to 1/3 of his blood. This can result in a host of problems for the newborn and can take up to six months for the baby to make that blood back. To donate the blood, the cord must be clamped immediately following delivery. The only reason donating does not alter routine clamping times is that it is not yet standard practice to wait until the cord stops pulsating. The research in this area is very clear. Too bad it takes the AAP so long to catch on.

Furthermore, if you do decide to donate your baby's cord blood, it is important to know that only 25% or less of donations actually get "banked" for donation. The rest are discarded if not enough blood is collected.

Why not speak up to the physician and specify that you would like your baby to rightfully receive its needed blood, so the cord is not to be clamped early. For further information, check out this great website http://www.theholisticparent.org/Cord_Blood_Donation.html
Karen- Obviously people disagree on this topic. To each its own as the verdict is still out on this. IF there was no use for cord blood and stem cells, why would public banks want people donating in the first place? I'm hoping for the day we can put our differences aside and that every mother in the US can bank their newborn's blood without having to pay thousands of dollars to do it or donate to a public bank where she may not have immediate access to her child's cells if she ever needed them. There is so much money being made in the treatment of diseases with big pharmaceuticals pumping us full of pills and cancer treatment like chemo, etc. A little prevention and hope in medical science and research can go a long way. This is my last post. I am not trying to convince anyone. Just stating my personal opinion :)




Kathryn Blitz said:
If you have actually observed TMTC births, then you should know that the cord has to be clamped immediately for a donation to occur. Now, I am not talking about cutting the cord, I am talking about clamping it. The actual cutting of the cord can occur at anytime. It is standard practice in hospital births to immediately clamp the cord, which stops the flow of the blood to the newborn. If the cord is not clamped, the blood will flow back into the newborn as it should, however, there will not be enough blood left in the cord for donation. It is actually difficult to obtain enough blood from the cord for the specified amount required for donation, which is why only 25% of donations actually get banked.

No, it does not take one to three hours for the cord to stop pulsating. It takes on average several minutes. There have been instances of pulsating taking up to 20 minutes.

The collection does not take place in another area; it takes place immediately following the delivery of the infant before the placenta has even been delivered. It is not necessary to cut the cord for a donation, only clamp it. If it is waited until a later time to collect the cord blood when say the placenta and cord are just sitting in a small container on the physician's instrument table, there will not be blood in the cord, it will have flowed out into the container. It doesn't automatically just sit in the cord; it is meant to flow somewhere. This can be observed by anyone; when the baby is first birthed, the cord attached to the newborn is fat and obviously filled with blood as you can see the large vein running throughit. Later, after the placenta and cord has been sitting out awhile, the cord is thin and white as all the blood has been drained out.

I am thoroughly stocked that you wouldn't know the procedures for collecting cord blood if you have actually been to many births.

Maureen Stevens said:
The research in this area is very clear.

It can take up to one and half to three hours for pulsing at the umbilical base to completely disappear...Could you post that research?

A recent (2009) Cochrane Review …Early versus delayed umbilical cord clamping in preterm infants studied the effects of the timing of umbilical cord clamping in hospitals. In the review of studies on babies born prematurely, delaying cord clamping for just a very short time helped some of the baby's blood from the placenta pass to the baby to help the flow of blood to the baby's lungs. Term infants whose cord clamping occurred later than 60 seconds after birth had a statistically higher risk of neonatal jaundice requiring phototherapy.

There is a lot of wrong information out there on private websites. Having observed public cord banking at numerous births (TMTC) the cord is not cut immediately, but at the couples discretion and the father/SO cuts the cord if desired and after delivery of the placenta the collection takes place in another area....cord blood is collected from the placenta… because umbilical cord blood or cord blood is the blood that stays in the umbilical cord and placenta after the birth of an infant.


Kathryn Blitz said:
Maureen said,
"The cord blood is collected after the baby is born and the umbilical cord is clamped and cut, it does not affect the baby or the birth experience and does not alter routine practice for the timing of umbilical cord clamping.

The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) encourages families to donate their newborn’s cord blood, which is normally discarded at birth, to public cord blood banks for use by other individuals in need."

This is incorrect. Donating a baby's cord blood absolutely affects the baby as it deprives the baby of up to 1/3 of his blood. This can result in a host of problems for the newborn and can take up to six months for the baby to make that blood back. To donate the blood, the cord must be clamped immediately following delivery. The only reason donating does not alter routine clamping times is that it is not yet standard practice to wait until the cord stops pulsating. The research in this area is very clear. Too bad it takes the AAP so long to catch on.

Furthermore, if you do decide to donate your baby's cord blood, it is important to know that only 25% or less of donations actually get "banked" for donation. The rest are discarded if not enough blood is collected.

Why not speak up to the physician and specify that you would like your baby to rightfully receive its needed blood, so the cord is not to be clamped early. For further information, check out this great website http://www.theholisticparent.org/Cord_Blood_Donation.html
The thing that bothers me about this debate is that the person who started this thread was wondering how many expectant moms were considering banking. She wasn't asking for anyone's opinions on it. I really feel like the thread was hijacked by people who really had no business posting in the first place because none of them were addressing the OP's question. All of the heated debate can be offensive to those of us who are considering or even planning on banking. Personally, I'm not offended because I know with my daughter's health history, this is the right choice for us. And if other families feel it is in the best interest of THEIR family to spend the money and bank their baby's cord blood without a clear indication of a need, that is their business, and not up for debate. If you people want to debate, IMO, you should take it somewhere else. Start your own thread. But I'm sure all of the bickering and judgement is preventing others from actually answering the OP's question.
I can read that you are all passionate about this subject; and I admire that passion. This should not be neither a debate nor a challenge to others opinions but a place for those considering cord blood banking to learn the pros and cons; research the subject and then make an educated choice that best fits their family. I was not aware that the person who began this was just looking for a yes I am or no I am not, and if you were I sincerely apologize.

Obviously cord blood banking and the optimal timing for cord clamping remains controversial and I believe that each family should choose whatever they feel is best from the research they have read…keeping in mind that all research sources are not equal…The Cochrane Database is an excellent source as they take all the available updated research from around the world and review it and give an unbiased conclusion. This data base is available to all.

Comments in:
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008;(2):CD004074. …
Obstet Gynecol. 2008 Jul;112(1):177-8.
JAMA. 2007 Mar 21;297(11):1257-8.

At home and hospital births I have seen both the placenta and cord continue to pulsate for a long time after being separated from the mom. And what about a lotus birth? Many people have very different ways they choose to birth, and that is as it should be.

Possibly the cord blood banking procedure differs by state and by hospital and by parents preference. The hospital at which I teach clinical is involved in public cord blood donation for use and research and is very respectful of the birth process and the early hours after birth. All babes are placed with mom immediately after birth (as long as baby is stable) to begin the breastfeeding relationship (even C-sec moms and babes). They room in till discharge. Collection of cord blood (or any other hospital procedure) should never interfere with this process.

If only 25% of the CORD BLOODcollection is used … There is plenty for everyone as the placenta itself is a rich source of stem cells. Over 4 million babies are born each year…and that 25% could help a lot of families.




Education is empowement.


Empowered Mommy said:
Karen- Obviously people disagree on this topic. To each its own as the verdict is still out on this. IF there was no use for cord blood and stem cells, why would public banks want people donating in the first place? I'm hoping for the day we can put our differences aside and that every mother in the US can bank their newborn's blood without having to pay thousands of dollars to do it or donate to a public bank where she may not have immediate access to her child's cells if she ever needed them. There is so much money being made in the treatment of diseases with big pharmaceuticals pumping us full of pills and cancer treatment like chemo, etc. A little prevention and hope in medical science and research can go a long way. This is my last post. I am not trying to convince anyone. Just stating my personal opinion :)




Kathryn Blitz said:
If you have actually observed TMTC births, then you should know that the cord has to be clamped immediately for a donation to occur. Now, I am not talking about cutting the cord, I am talking about clamping it. The actual cutting of the cord can occur at anytime. It is standard practice in hospital births to immediately clamp the cord, which stops the flow of the blood to the newborn. If the cord is not clamped, the blood will flow back into the newborn as it should, however, there will not be enough blood left in the cord for donation. It is actually difficult to obtain enough blood from the cord for the specified amount required for donation, which is why only 25% of donations actually get banked.

No, it does not take one to three hours for the cord to stop pulsating. It takes on average several minutes. There have been instances of pulsating taking up to 20 minutes.

The collection does not take place in another area; it takes place immediately following the delivery of the infant before the placenta has even been delivered. It is not necessary to cut the cord for a donation, only clamp it. If it is waited until a later time to collect the cord blood when say the placenta and cord are just sitting in a small container on the physician's instrument table, there will not be blood in the cord, it will have flowed out into the container. It doesn't automatically just sit in the cord; it is meant to flow somewhere. This can be observed by anyone; when the baby is first birthed, the cord attached to the newborn is fat and obviously filled with blood as you can see the large vein running throughit. Later, after the placenta and cord has been sitting out awhile, the cord is thin and white as all the blood has been drained out.

I am thoroughly stocked that you wouldn't know the procedures for collecting cord blood if you have actually been to many births.

Maureen Stevens said:
The research in this area is very clear.

It can take up to one and half to three hours for pulsing at the umbilical base to completely disappear...Could you post that research?

A recent (2009) Cochrane Review …Early versus delayed umbilical cord clamping in preterm infants studied the effects of the timing of umbilical cord clamping in hospitals. In the review of studies on babies born prematurely, delaying cord clamping for just a very short time helped some of the baby's blood from the placenta pass to the baby to help the flow of blood to the baby's lungs. Term infants whose cord clamping occurred later than 60 seconds after birth had a statistically higher risk of neonatal jaundice requiring phototherapy.

There is a lot of wrong information out there on private websites. Having observed public cord banking at numerous births (TMTC) the cord is not cut immediately, but at the couples discretion and the father/SO cuts the cord if desired and after delivery of the placenta the collection takes place in another area....cord blood is collected from the placenta… because umbilical cord blood or cord blood is the blood that stays in the umbilical cord and placenta after the birth of an infant.


Kathryn Blitz said:
Maureen said,
"The cord blood is collected after the baby is born and the umbilical cord is clamped and cut, it does not affect the baby or the birth experience and does not alter routine practice for the timing of umbilical cord clamping.

The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) encourages families to donate their newborn’s cord blood, which is normally discarded at birth, to public cord blood banks for use by other individuals in need."

This is incorrect. Donating a baby's cord blood absolutely affects the baby as it deprives the baby of up to 1/3 of his blood. This can result in a host of problems for the newborn and can take up to six months for the baby to make that blood back. To donate the blood, the cord must be clamped immediately following delivery. The only reason donating does not alter routine clamping times is that it is not yet standard practice to wait until the cord stops pulsating. The research in this area is very clear. Too bad it takes the AAP so long to catch on.

Furthermore, if you do decide to donate your baby's cord blood, it is important to know that only 25% or less of donations actually get "banked" for donation. The rest are discarded if not enough blood is collected.

Why not speak up to the physician and specify that you would like your baby to rightfully receive its needed blood, so the cord is not to be clamped early. For further information, check out this great website http://www.theholisticparent.org/Cord_Blood_Donation.html
Empowered Mommy said:
The decision to bank private is very personal and for sure no one should be made to feel guilty. But you can't blame private companies for making a profit (they have been the ones puring money into research considering that in the past 8 years there has been no public funding directed at stem cell research. So they did to be able to pay for the research they're doing.

We read up on it alot and asked our primary care doctor and OB-gyn and decided to bank with our pregnancy. Neither doctor had a monetary incentive to recommend any particular company. They mentioned public banking but the risk was that the cells would not be available for our family’s use or that our hospital wouldn't be able to support this.

They recommended Cord Blood Registry or Viacord (both are good). But we decided to go with CBR because I found a discount coupon online for it. I used it when I enrolled online M1998 and got $250 Off the fees.
Total came out to $1,900 (including the one-time registration, specimen shipment and first year storage). To us it was worth it. We don’t spend on fancy vacations, expensive cars or house remodeling.
Wow! I didn't realize it had gone up so much in almost 7 years. When we banked our son's cord blood, I think it cost a little less than $400 for the collection kit and the return shipping was about $80. Our annual storage fee is $50. I just checked their website (CryoCell) and it's up to $1600 for collection kit and return shipping and then $125 annual storage fee.
Terry- I compared all 3 big private companies: Cryocell, Viacord and CBR and CBR came out on top because of their discount and monthly payment programs. I used a coupon code which I am happy to share: M1998 when I enrolled online with them. Like I said, that got me $250 OFF my fees which was nice. It doesn't have an expiration date or any strings attached because it's part of the CBR Mom Program. I am sharing it with my friends and family too! :)

Terry Carter said:
Empowered Mommy said:
The decision to bank private is very personal and for sure no one should be made to feel guilty. But you can't blame private companies for making a profit (they have been the ones puring money into research considering that in the past 8 years there has been no public funding directed at stem cell research. So they did to be able to pay for the research they're doing.

We read up on it alot and asked our primary care doctor and OB-gyn and decided to bank with our pregnancy. Neither doctor had a monetary incentive to recommend any particular company. They mentioned public banking but the risk was that the cells would not be available for our family’s use or that our hospital wouldn't be able to support this.

They recommended Cord Blood Registry or Viacord (both are good). But we decided to go with CBR because I found a discount coupon online for it. I used it when I enrolled online M1998 and got $250 Off the fees.
Total came out to $1,900 (including the one-time registration, specimen shipment and first year storage). To us it was worth it. We don’t spend on fancy vacations, expensive cars or house remodeling.
Wow! I didn't realize it had gone up so much in almost 7 years. When we banked our son's cord blood, I think it cost a little less than $400 for the collection kit and the return shipping was about $80. Our annual storage fee is $50. I just checked their website (CryoCell) and it's up to $1600 for collection kit and return shipping and then $125 annual storage fee.
My husband and I decided that we wanted to do private cord blood banking, and we are glad that we did. It is an amazing thing and I disagree with those who say that the cost of private CBB outweighs the small chance that you might need it. I am sure that in the case that someday our son's cord blood could enhance the quality of life, or even save a life, by far out weighs any cost.
I would second what Maureen has stated, and add that neither the American College of Nurse Midwives, nor the American College of OB GYN endorse the private storage of umbilical cord blood without medical necessity. Your baby's umbilical cord blood is far more likely to be used if it is donated to a public banking program, than it is saved for your own family's potential use. Keep in mind that one of the major uses of umbilcal stem cells at this point is for the treatment of childhood leukemias. Because there can be a genetic component of leukemia present from fetalhood, if a child develops the disease, it would be unlikely that the child's own cord blood stem cells would be transplanted back to them, as they would be considered to also be affected.
And one other thing on medical necessity is that there are numerous cord blood banks in existance that will store umbilical cord blodd for none or very little charge if there truly is medical necessity within the family (i.e. another child affected with a disease treatable with stem cells, etc).
If you don't have a public vord blodd bank in your area that you may donate to, contact cryobanks international in Florida; they have a donation program where they will accept donations from around the country. Women can do the paperwork on line, they send you the kit, and the blood is Fed-Exed back to them after the birth. http://www.cryo-intl.com/enroll/donating/ is the website to sign up

RSS

FOLLOW US ON

Follow My Best Birth on Twitter or join us on Facebook.

Sponsors











© 2014   Created by MyBestBirth Admin.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service