Banking Cord Blood
This is something I've thought about before and then today I saw a phamphlet in a doc's office.

Has anyone here had experience with adoption and banking cord blood? At first I thought this was over the top. Now I'm thinking if you don't have a "full" medical history for one or both bparents that this could be a literal lifesaver if an illness ever God forbid presented itself.

If you do have exp. with (or even if you don't and you think you could lend some advice) how did you first approach this topic? I'm fully aware that every eparent has the right to choose parenting before TPR, so it might be a small financial loss on our part if that would happen. I'm also thinking this probably wouldn't work with last minute matches with little time for discussion or preparation. (Maybe not, I'd have to research specific companies more.)

Birthmoms, would you be completely put off with this thought or look at it as a positive medical step for a child's future??

Any thoughts would be appreciated Smile
It's probably not a small financial loss. When my son was born in 2005, the setup cost was $1,600. That was at one of the few banks that I heard was reputable. It is located in Tucson, AZ. I'm not saying others aren't good and I don't know where I got the info that some aren't good, it's just something I remember.

The last I checked, the American Academy of Pediatricians advised against doing this because it is very unlikely anyone would ever need it AND it is expensive. If money isn't an issue for you, then that part isn't an issue.

I used to work with patients who had bone marrow transplants. That would be one of the big uses for cord blood. I spoke with the pediatric BMT doctor about this. At that time, he advised against it. He said that if a child had cancer, that probably meant there was something wrong with their bone marrow, so giving them back their cord blood probably meant giving them back bone marrow that has already proven it has problems. Therefore, what cord blood was most likely good for was siblings.

We chose not to save my son's cord blood because of the expense. Also, I wanted to delay clamping the cord so he would get all his blood. Clamping the cord while there is still exchange between mom and baby means the baby didn't get all their blood. Also, if the baby is having some trouble at first, as my son sort of did, you are taking away a known oxygen source. So, since I'd already insisted on not clamping the cord until I okay'ed it, the midwife laid him on me and me and the nurses stimulated him to breathe while he was getting oxygen by mask AND through the cord.

In my case it turned out that I hung onto my placenta for an hour so agreed to have the cord cut before the placenta was born--he was 15 or 20 minutes old by then and the cord was no longer giving him blood. Because it took so long for the placenta to be delivered, I doubt if there would have been enough good blood left to save.

My understanding is the cord has to be cut right away, denying blood to the baby. But a lot of ob's would do that anyway.

There was a time when I really regretted that we didn't save my son's blood. I felt comforted knowing the delay in my placenta may have meant I couldn't save anyways (I assume this, I do not know.)

So, depending on the relationship you have with the expectant mom and depending on the relationship she has with her midwife or doctor, will determine a lot of what happens. Do you bank the blood? Is the cord cut early or when the baby is done with it? Etc., etc. And, are you willing to risk almost $2,000 for a baby that may or may not become yours?

What I would recommend you offer is an expanded genetic test. It is only $93 and tests for over 50 metabolic problems. The state mandated newborn screening tests don't check for all these diseases. (I think that's criminal, but I think that about a lot of things.) Here is information: [url=]Order StepOne®[/url]
All times are GMT. The time now is 12:23 am.