Conference moira::parenting_v3

    
    What is the likelihood of needing a blood transfusion as a result of
    labor and delivery complications?   What are the statistics?  I'll
    bet that the hospital has this information and perhaps it would 
    set your mind at ease.   
    
    Not to downplay your concern, but personally I don't figure that the 
    blood supply is *really* that unsafe, combined with the (un)likelihood 
    of requiring a transfusion, leads me to believe that there are plenty
    of other things to worry about! 
    
    I stand ready to be enlightened by the readers of this notes as to
    just how common the need for a transfusion might be....
    
    
    Carol

    I am a regular donor of both whole blood and platelets through Stanford
    University Hospital.  I don't know about the Red Cross, but I know that
    getting blood through hospitals like Stanford is about as safe as you
    can get.  Even though I am a repeat donor (every 6 weeks for
    platelets), I am still subjected to the screening rigors and my
    donation is tested every time, as with everyone else's donation.  I
    believe that is true across the country.
    
    Also, FWIW, I had my son at 34, had a high risk pregnancy and
    difficult delivery.  Even though C-section was discussed a couple of
    times during labor, we managed to have a normal delivery.  I am now 36
    and we are trying for #2 - I wouldn't let your age be a factor if your
    pregnancy has been normal so far.
    
    Cathy
    521-3164
    Santa Clara
    

    It's me again, with one more thought on blood supplies - a lot of the
    people who are showing up with AIDS now after a transfusion had those
    transfusions up to TEN years ago, when blood was bought and sold like a
    commodity.  If the local junkie needed twenty bucks for a fix or a
    bottle, s/he would go down to the commercial blood bank and sell a
    pint.  No questions asked, minimal screening, etc.
    
    FWIW,
    
    Cathy
    

    I understand your concerns - they were mine, too. I have 2 friends
    who needed blood transfusions as a result of hemorhaging after
    birth. When I was pregnant I asked people to donate blood. My
    midwife thought 2 units up front would be a safe bet. My mother
    and a friend donated to the blood bank at the hospital I delivered
    at. I didn't need it, but I felt more comfortable knowing it was
    there. 
    
    Alice

    I feel like I need to be the cynical one here and point out that
    you should make sure your friends and relatives get the same tests
    everybody else does.  I assume the blood bank or hospital would
    require this, but even if it doesn't, I'd insist. 
    
    We don't know everything about other people's private lives, and
    people do tend to keep quiet about unsafe practices like sleeping
    around and sharing drug needles that spread HIV virus.  Since a
    virus is an equal-opportunity infector, paying no attention to
    the social class or moral worth of the victim, it's better to be
    careful. 
    
    Also, HIV is not the only danger from banked blood.  Hepatitis B
    is more common and I think harder to detect -- anybody know for
    sure about that? 
    
    --bonnie

    My wife has had several transfusions of blood for a med conditions she
    has.  She has to get cross typed and matched everytime she needs a 
    transfusion.  This is because of antibodies in the blood?  Anyway
    she can't always get the same blood from the same donors.  I understand
    things can change within a weeks time that will require different
    blood supply.  I don't understand it totally.  I know if you or someone
    donates blood then you are entitled to get blood at no charge or
    reduced rates.  All her transfusions are covered by insurance.
    About the risk of contaminated blood, what's the risk on not having
    the transfusion?  There really isn't much choise sometimes.
    Good luck
    Dave

    Thanks so much for the prompt & helpful replies.
    
    I guess it all boils down to an individual decision made based on all
    the stats and facts (and current fears).  I faced a similar decision
    back in March when considering an amnio.  I had sleepless nights
    worrying myself sick about a miscarriage from the procedure,
    considering the odds I heard (from 1 in 200 to 1 in 700).  Finally I
    went ahead and had it done; I lucked out that time.
    
    With a blood transfusion during delivery, everyone seems to play it
    down.  The hospital blood bank said (without really looking it up) that
    the odds are less than 1/2 of 1 percent that I'd need it.  They also
    said that even with so much horrors in the news, they hadn't had much
    panic-related inquiries on "special collections."  He said that the
    blood supply this hospital receives is safer than most because it's
    from the surrounding communities which are lower-risk than most.  When
    asked if there has been any contaminated blood given in a transfusion
    in the history of the hospital, he stated none that they know of.
    
    One of you made a good point that the tainted blood which gave donees
    the disease happened awhile back and that current screening procedures
    are much more stringent.  The Red Cross says that it takes 7 days to
    screen for diseases such as AIDS & Hepatitis and wants the collection
    to occur 20 days prior to due date.  Furthermore, the hospital says
    that the same donor cannot give more on a standby basis even though 20
    days ago she had been screened OK and gave that 1 unit of blood.  They
    treat every unit individually and each must be tested.
    
    At this point I feel undecided on whether I should go ahead or not.  As
    one of you mentioned, the low probability of needing a transfusion
    during delivery plus the low risk of the current blood supply lowers my
    risk of contracting the diseases even more.  Am I being too paranoid?
    I guess I'll have to make that decision within the next week or so,
    primarily based on how much I want to inconvenience another person.  I
    have few relatives and so few people actually know their own
    bloodtypes!
    
    Well, thanks again for your support and info.  If you have more, please
    feel free to share, as this topic is probably going to stay hot for a
    while.
    
    -Stella 

My first child was born almost thirteen years ago as a caesarian.  I had the
additional complication of a placenta gravis (over the cervix) and lost over
two liters of blood (I have know idea what a "unit" is, 2 liters is somewhat
over two quarts).  This is at the time when AIDS existed but was not yet
checked in blood donations.  Additionally, I am A- my husband is A+ but the
baby was also A- so no complications due to the Rhesus factor.  I had two 
liters of blood transfusions.  

Some minor factor in the blood they gave me caused me to break out in a rash 
and exhibit an allergic reaction to the bandages they used.  I had injections
to conteract that.

I later saw a program on birth which said that less than ten percent of the
deliveries need to result in caesarians (many caesarians are done unnecessarily
according to this program).  It also said that less thn 6% of those caesarians
performed result in complications, so I was in the unlucky .6% of all births.
I do not know what their sample was, probably Europe.  They also gave figures
about the number of pregancies resulting in miscarriage which were quite high
although I can't remember what they were exactly.  

A few years ago I came down with an blood infection which made my lymph nodes
hurt and made me think I had cancer.  I had several tests done which confirmed
that this was a rather strong case of an infection that 85% of the people get
in a much milder form.  They also tested for HIV which they do as a matter of
course every time they take a blood sample nowadays.  The first thing my doctor
told me when he gave me the results of the test was, "Well, you don't have 
AIDS".  I was actually very relieved because the blood transfusion had been
nagging in the back of my mind for some time.

You probably won't need a transfusion.  If you do and if it sets your mind at 
ease to prepare with it through known donors, then I think you should make the 
effort to find them.  But if you can't and you do need the transfusion, accept
the inevitable.  You'll have done all you can and there is no use worrying
about it.  

Hope all the worrying is in vain and you have an easy delivery of a healthy
little one!

ccb

re .8:

As we've been reminded in the media, AIDS was first identified 10 years ago.

Yes, but it was around before they identified it and tested for it.  People 
with AIDS could unwittingly have given blood which was subsequently used in
transfusions before the disease had been identified.  ccb

    You said that you have few relatives to act as donors - don;t forget
    that in most sites, Digital has a "donor club" and any employee who has
    ever donated blood to that club is eligible for gratis blood
    transfusions.  Family members are eligible, too.  Check with your site
    personnel rep and see if your site has a donor's club.
    
    Cathy
    

    The procedures and attitudes towards blood donation in the US are
    so different than in Canada. I think the we are legally not allowed
    to pre-donate for ourselves or one another; donating blood to the 
    red cross has always been considered a good deed......do you still get
    paid for it in the US? I also heard somewhere that the Canadian red
    cross does a much more thorough screening and the resulting cases of
    aids or hiv positive cases reported from blood transfusions in Canada
    is very very low or even nil. Aside from the socialized medicine angle,
    why can it not be this way in the states too? 
    It is only when I hear about this topic from Americans do I really
    think about what it means to need blood transfusions in some places.
    (thanks for waking me up to the dangerous world, gang)
    
    Monica
    

    I just wanted to re state what I said in a previous note, there IS
    Synthetic Blood available, check into that. 
    
    Also consider the realistic possibiltiy that less than a single number
    of births really need to be transfused.
    
    I know you are genuinely concerned, and I'm not trying to make your
    fear any less, but with today's medical technology an extremely low
    number of deliveries result in a hemorage requiring transfusions.
    
    Please relax for your baby's sake!
    Lyn

    Well, I had 2 planned c-sections because of pregnancy complications.  The 
    second one took much longer than anticipated because the anesthesia
    didn't really work (epideral - YOWWCH!).  I don't know how much blood I
    lost - presumably the 'normal' amount or a little more.  A day previous
    to the second one, I also had some minimal internal bleeding, as a
    result of a complication of an amnio.
    
    At any rate, I had asked ahead of time if I should consider donating
    blood for myself ahead of time, and my OB (who, by the way, is an
    EXCELLENT OB) said that they had never had to give blood to anyone with
    a c.section.  She said it COULD happen, but a c.section is so
    controlled, the odds of it happening are miniscule.  I would think
    you'd have more chance of hemmoraging (sp?) after the fact - and even
    that's not very likely. 
    
    I wouldn't worry too much about it.  If you worry about every possible
    thing that could go wrong, you'll drive yourself right to the looney
    bin!
    
    Good Luck!
    Patty