The gentlebirth.org website is provided courtesy of
Ronnie Falcao, LM MS, a homebirth midwife in Mountain View, CA


Civil Action to Protect Baby's Umbilical Cord

Easy Steps to a Safer Pregnancy - View e-book or Download PDF - FREE!
An interactive resource for moms on easy steps they can take to reduce exposure to chemical toxins during pregnancy.

Other excellent resources about avoiding toxins during pregnancy

These are easy to read and understand and are beautifully presented.

I believe parents must become more informed about doctors and nurses, perhaps some midwives depending on who trains them, and surgeons, should have a letter from the would-be-parents directing them what they want done for their baby, on the matter of the cord cutting.   I would encourage parents not to allow the immediate cord cutting.  I believe there is scientific reasons that doing so robs the infant of nutrients like iron to stop going into the infant, robs the infant of all its blood and this may weaken the baby, and of course, if the baby is not breathing well on its own, has robbed it of a life support and oxygen, and by the time man gets the little infant breathing, complications may be severe.  I suggest the letter be written by a lawyer.  If the doctors/nurses, midwife, surgeon impose their will and force of habit and cut the cord before the infant has had all the benefits of its own organ, then I suggest they file a Writ.  The Writ will name the hospital, the nurse, the doctor where this lack of concern and wishes of the parent, happened.  I have talked to a Medical Consultant, and he agrees that where communication can be proved of the will of the parent for their child, "yes" civil suit could entitle to damages.  The Writ would allow a period of time to see what the subtle damage may be in the child's development in learning skills and in behavior.  I also talked to a lawyer, and he too said, "Yes, in theory, a Writ could be filed, immediately, and before the evidence is known of harm, subtle or otherwise.   The Writ filed is a protection and a duty to the infant, that may have sustained life time impairments.

I consider this an open letter, and you may share it with others, if you wish.

I believe the only way to stop this practice, regardless if many in the medical profession have blindly gone along with it, is to take civil action.

I would go as far to say, that vicarious liability and responsibility make go to the total professions and even extend to the College of Physicians.  That would require to poll the members of these associations and ask them to either step back from the practice and the reasons for doing so, or to affirm the practice of immediate cord cutting, stating science and factual documentation of their reasons; personal, and not told by actually observed of the harm of too much blood will be done to either the mother and/or infant.  This means a jury will be able to give a reasonable decision on reasonableness of the pro's or con's of the immediate cord cutting.

In the meantime, until this hypothetical civil case comes about, the parents must be encouraged to be informed, and make a decision and being informed, make sure the doctor does as they request and believe is in the best interest of their infant.

I point out to you that during 1801, Erasmus Darwin, the Grandfather of Charles Darwin, the believer of the "Survival of the Fittest" warned against the early clamping off the cord.   He wrote, "it would be very injurious to tie "the navel-string" too soon and urged them clamping be delayed until the infant has breathed repeatedly and all cord pulsation ceased.

I am doing research on the Apgar Score.  And it seems the doctors and nurses were clamping the cord off first, then noticing the survival of the baby, after its was cut from its life line and how well each baby did, or did not do, and the results of anesthetic on the infant being born, as to these observations of the baby.  Most drugs given a mother at birth are going to do something to the baby. Some will not be born crying because of the drug, and need all the help they can get from the cord.  Unless, of course, the mothers blood checks heavy with a drug, and so the baby is drugged, likewise.

Any other information, particularly, if a legal case has ever been attempted on this cord cutting issue, or other information you might send me, would be appreciated.

I am trying to stop the practice of cord cutting, immediately, in my own town.  I am writing the Ministry of Health, as well as I have yet to hear from the BC Midwife's Association.  They have refused to tell me what they are being told to practice by the doctors, in BC.

I have not heard from the trainer of Doctors, Dr. Cairn, of UBC.  I have heard from the Nurses association, and they sent me their code of ethics.  The nurses obligation, since she is paid by the hospital, is to the client.  Therefore, it is her duty to report concern of any medical practice that can cause harm to the client/patient/infant.  Soooo. nurses are not free to close their eyes to a consequential and risky practice, as they believe they are protected, if they assist a doctor to cut an infant's cord immediately.


This Web page is referenced from other pages containing related information about Umbilical Cord Issues


SEARCH gentlebirth.org

Main Index Page of the Midwife Archives

Main page of gentlebirth.org         Mirror site

Please e-mail feedback about errors of fact, spelling, grammar or semantics. Thank you.

Permission to link to this page is hereby granted.
About the Midwife Archives / Midwife Archives Disclaimer