WELCOME T0 PROTECT BABIES - www.123babybirth.com This document was last updated June 1, 2002. Please browse down the Contents. This web site supports science-based-facts of the birth process. No lies. No deception. No false medical reasons to rob a baby of its placenta and cord blood. This site opposes myths and fears for reasons of doing unsafe medical practices on newborn babies. Such risk-taking is the drugging of the mothers during labor. This is being encouraged in most hospitals rather then the mother being educated to birth in gravity positions or using warm water baths to prevent tearing and help relax the muscles for child-bearing. The mother, in most cases, even with university training, is not well educated in the birth process or the purpose of increasing strength in contractions. With knowledge and the use of safer methods of control of contractions, and the avoidance of the use of drugs is known to cut down the risk of the mother needing a c-section, or begging for one, or being told she has an incompetent cervix, thus, her body was not made to deliver babies, normally!!!! HOG WASH, in most instances. Women simply have been exploited. The drugging of the mother, and the endangering to herself and her baby in hospitals, is called "active management." The art and following intuition for natural child birth is not likely offered or shared to the expectant mother during any of her prenatal classes. Most of the prenatal classes are being controlled by the government and its medical agents. Many such courses are taught by registered-nurses who are not specifically trained on the infant's circulation system. The circulation of the system of the fetus is not standard training. The nurses are not specifically trained to have knowledge that "all" drugs cross the placenta. Nor to tell the mother she can legally asks for testing of her baby's urine or a sample of blood cells taken from the placenta, to confirm the drugs were in her baby at birth, causing the suspicions of many latent and internal damage to her child. Urine tests can also be, on the mother's request, used for PKU tests . There is never a real need to put a needle into the baby's system, at all, during birth, or after birth, in most instances. Particularly, not with informed consent and other options made known. Often the c-sections are not told to the naive expecting mother that they are a major operation carrying risks to both mother and child. Not only is there risk of death to both, but often both come out of the hospital with infections. Those guiding the prenatal classes fail to tell the mother the next time she is expecting, she is likely going to have a c-section, again. But fail to tell the reasons why. Much of that repeat c-section is depending on the cut and the manner of stitching. This is seldom discussed or the intentions of the surgeon to do immediate clamping on the child's lifeline often the real cause of IRDS . Often the nurses are trained to promote the safety of the drugs offered the mother and the safety of the c-section, stating, "25 percent of you here, in this course, will likely have a c-section." This is mentally preparing the mother for the acceptance of a c-section rather than preparing her how to avoid one, in the first place. One good way is to labor at home as long as possible. Rent a room near a hospital and leave just in time to have the baby, that is what I did for my second birth, and I would have for the first birth, too, had the doctor not encouraged I go into the hospital for the breaking of the water. Such information is NOT allowed at the government controlled prenatal classes. On review of private prenatal classes, I have serious concerns that LaMaze , is now associated with cord blood banks. Of the prenatal classes I looked into, there is no teaching of the art of management of an emergency birth such as leaving the baby's umbilical cord alone, and wrapping the baby and the placenta in a warm towel, and keeping the baby in tact, not tying or clamping, or severing the cord, at all. At least, not until the mother is satisfied the baby has received all blood transfusion from the placenta, and all pulsation had ceased, ideally, the placenta expelled before any invasive touching of the child's lifeline. This is true for all babies, whenever, or however delivered. It is a common concern that children born with drugs and/or by c-sections and who have had hasty clamping are not going to have the optimal health and all natural abilities, and all organs and cells working on all cylinders, so to speak. This is when you compare these violated children to those not so afflicted by the poor birth management and treatment. The facts are there are billions of dollars, if not trillions, to be made by the medical fields by those mother imposed on by what is called the hospital's method of "active management." Most of the medical personnel are now trained to not be critical of what they are being taught and why. Following "active management" which is the use of drugs, is imposed and with intent and without choice of the mother, is immediate to early umbilical cord clamping. A clamp is put on the child's still pulsating umbilical cord within 30 seconds of its birth. Some babies have their cord clamped when only their head is born, or shoulders, and the babies are caused to gag by syringe bulbs put down their throats, and their lungs are not even expanded to take in air. The mother then is subjected to injections of Oxytocin. Prime targets for cord blood are large babies, mostly, during c-sections. Past research testifies large babies tolerate the quicker clamping then do smaller babies. False medical reasons are given for immediately clamping the premature babies. Premature babies just happen to have more valuable Mother cells, (cord stem cells) then a full-term baby. I would think they would go to cord blood banks, with or without the parents consent. All babies, all sizes, whenever born, are being risked to hasty clamping. NO discrimination, in the size or gestation period of the baby, in most instances. Most parents will not say anything, after being humiliated and conned in child birth. But when we have no complaints, the medical malpractice and the corruption will continue. The Mother cells, sought after by science researchers, are the cord stem cells to be used in experimental research to attempt to treat disease. The diseases are likely rooted, originally in the bad birth practices. Hasty clamping, currently, a trend, on an international scheme. See Hole in the Heart . The facts of early clamping, have proven a baby's tolerance or will to survive. The science research has indicated even babies deprived of 20 to 50 percent total blood volume will survive if revived, quickly . The facts are a baby deprived of 20 percent total blood volume can go into shock and die. When they do die, there is NO investigation. This now is particularly if drugs are used and the baby is a stillborn. I guess that is what you call planning of things done decently and in order. The government controls who will or will not be investigated as to cause of death. Involved is the Attorney General Department, who govern over the Coroner's Act. This Act, in British Columbia, Canada, was changed recently. Now, the deaths of children in the womb, particularly, if drugs were involved and their use by a licensed medical person are not investigated, as a likely contributing factor in the death, if not the actual cause. These drugs to quicken labor are actually akin to abortion drugs. But the expecting mother, wanting her child, and a healthy child, is NOT so informed of those side-effects of drugs offered to her or even imposed on her during labor. But the blood from her stillborn child, in some situations, can still be expropriated/salvaged to be used in science research, along with aborted babies' blood and organs, too. So why did the government have abortions done in children's hospitals? Seems, to me, it was convenient when aborted babies blood separated into components like hormones could be put to good use, quickly. I wonder how many mothers know they are being exploited in being offered a quick hasty abortion. Many abortions following questionable and not absolute assured tests, their baby "may" be defective. Such tests are done by inserting a needled into the mother's womb and taking fluid and/or tissue out. The tests are NOT conclusive but older women fear their child will be defective. The would-be-mothers, are led to believe the abortion was all for the best, and the baby too??? Unless a mother is prepared to abort her baby and give its blood and organs to science research, her body actually exploited for this purpose, she ought to stay away from testing. If the would-be-mother started her pregnancy with a drug free body, and her spouse had a drug free body, and they followed good nutrition, they are likely to have a healthy baby, as nature intended. They now need to know how to have a healthy birth experience, positive for both mother and child. As it is, I ask, "How many ways can women be conned? Let the medical societies and associations count the ways, eh! Of the surviving babies, tested for their tolerance, many will survive with assistance of oxygen administration, some with blood expanders, and some with both. All these are added costs to the health care. Most of those higher costs are unnecessary if proper birth procedures were being used. That is close to natural birth process, as possible, and the medical person locked outside the door of a rented hospital room, invited in, only if absolutely necessary, and the assurance of no clamp in their pockets. Those babies, violated by the clamp, and getting blood expanders, such as Ringer's Lactate, have risks of allergic reactions, or disease being introduced into their body. The baby's whole blood, trapped in the placenta, will be likely taken, expropriated, so to-speak, by the hospital administration staff and used for others, not necessarily for the own owner's needs. See the Chow Case-Law . In fact, the American Association of Pediatrics (APP) discourages the storage of the placenta blood for the infant's future needs. It does not discourage hasty clamping, but if done, but directs immediate use of the blood in public cord blood banks. DECEIT INVOLVED IN BLOOD DENIED THE BABY: This taking of the baby's blood, in many instances, will be done in secret. Hidden from the mother and the father will be the actual volume of the blood drained out of the placenta, anywhere from 50 ccs to over 1 cup of blood, 250 ccs (8.8 ounces). Sometimes the draining is done while the placenta is yet warm in the mother's womb. This is because they have experimented to prove that warm blood transfuses faster into bags or tubes. The fact is the mother is actually none-the-wiser. This is because she cannot feel the blood being drained from the baby's placenta. It is the baby's deprived blood, not the mother's blood that is sought. There are mostly unproven medical reasons the doctor and the nurse use to clamp the cord before it had naturally ceased to pulsate. Both may be in collusion with each other, and may collaborate with policies of the hospital, who may collaborate with policies set by who knows who set them? Many of the hospitals do send the placenta and blood to drug companies. No one seems to know, for sure what is going on. But so many governing associations, some with their hands in the taxpayer's purse, have no policies on this issue, yet they declare, "Oh, yes, we protect the public as to best practice possible, and no harm." Of the associations, and see the No Policies Series , none have stepped forward, so far, to offer apologies for the past deception, and the exploitation to women who trusted in no harm done if she used medical services of the hospitals and licensed and approved medical persons, male and female. All assumed the imposed so-called appropriate care was something a woman had to accept without complaints, or knowing to say, hands off, even to nurses handling her person. It seems by having confusion and no protective polices to the public, no one accepts legal responsibility. But persons are involved in doing things to babies and mothers and these are unnecessary harmful treatments or substances to mothers that should not be done, in most instances. EXEMPTION FROM CIVIL OR CRIMINAL LIABILITY: Does havIing no policies excempt anyone, even a medical person, or a member of the government who was on committees approving harmful or questionable practices from criminal and civil prosecution? Only a judge can determine that when the first attempt for private prosecution begins. This is NOT a witch hunt. People know who have assaulted their child and did not follow natural child birth practices. They know they did not discuss their intentions to clamp the child's umbilical cord, or to conceal the facts of science how much was deprived "their" baby by that needless treatment to "their" baby. They know the hospital staff did not give an informed consent listing the risks of drugs offered to the mother, very vulnerable, very tired of being pregant and not seeing her toes. They know every assaulted child, when it grows up can apply to have the facts known of its care at birth, and that all such records cannot be legally destroyed on a child until it is 7 years, I believe, beyond legal age of being an adult. For any hospital to do that is to do so at their own peril, I would think. The age of the child before records can be destroyed, and they should never be destroyed without consent, is likely 27 years old. Can the mother be named in the civil or criminal application, if she demaned the child to have its umbilical cord clamped immediately? I believe so. Anything is possible. But I would think the medical person had a duty to know better. The duty of all, including the parent, is to the child. I would think that a fundamental duty, not having to be written down. I do not think blood robbing of babies is protecting the public, but adding costs to our society in future higher costs to repair the latent disorders, to name a few: heart, lung, cancers, learning and behavior problems. If we check the persons having problems, can't get pass an average mark, no matter how hard they study, require special tutoring or private schooling, or even home-schooling, it is best to review the child's birth, to the drugs offered and accepted by the mother to the timing of the clamping of the umbilical cord, to administration of artificial blood, to the need of giving oxygen after the baby was off its natural supply to both. There, in that review you are going to find the likely root of all diseases, diabetics, thyroid problems, growth problems, sexuality problems, eating and sleeping disorders, blindness, deafness, muscle problems, just to name a few iatrogenic distress disorders all tied in with time efficiency, drugs, injections into the baby, and hasty clamping. NOW you cannot sue for natural process, but you sure can question interventions. While our duty is to help the person with anyone of these distress disorders to the body and to the mind, there is duty to eliminate the probable cause of them, too. This can be achieved by proper and factual and truthful information given to the males and females about planning for a family, from conception to the child's birth and this long before they are even thinking of their reproduction systems. The saying is, knowledge is power. It is natural that after the child's birth the uninformed parents are distracted. The parents are either busy with the needs of the baby, looking at its sex, inquiring about the tests being made and why the doctors and nurses have the child in their hands, and not in the hands of the parents. Why are the doctors and the nurses doing rituals on the baby, weighing, measuring...all done, quickly, and after they clamped the baby from its blood flow? All done within moments of the child's entrance to this world. That is NOT done in natural births where the parents are educated to be in control. So we need to take back babybirth and put it in the care of the parents, totally, in most instances. The parents are not observing this process on the placenta's delivery because they do not know all the facts. They have never studied the baby's placenta in any of their teachings at school. I mean really, really study the placenta and the veins and the arteries and the circulation system. And what is available in some of Biology textbooks, is stated with dogma to cut the human baby off its lifeline quickly at birth. Do vets do that? NOT if they value their own persons when dealing with someone's prized colt? No names of references to that information is given, that I can relate to the instructions to a name, so the author and the publisherare taking responsibility for any false teachings, not based in facts of science that are observable and repeatable today. After taking a weaker baby home, the parent's still are none-the-wiser that their baby is already likely iron deficient. This is something that will bother the child, likely the rest of his/her life, and if not checked at periods of the child's growth for sufficiency other problems can stem from that. But at the time the parents take the baby home, some hours after its birth in a hospital, they are on their own. Some of the signs of the weaker babies are they don't feed well, and get sick frequently. The nutrition to the already weakened child now depends on the parent's financial abilities. The okay and surviving child to assault at birth are going to have some kind of latent learning disorders that are sometimes not discovered until the child is of school age. Children not talking are not discovered until after the age of two. DOCTORS CARE TO THEIR OWN OFFSPRING: As to hasty clamping and taking the child's blood (assault and robbery of the child's property, blood), it would be most interesting, to know how each of the doctors doing this to another's child, treated their own? I recall a conversation between nurses who said after a intern's baby was born, a boy, everyone was so excited for him, that they totally forgot to clamp the child's cord for over 15 minutes. Yeah Right, and the next little colored baby boy was clamped immediately, no excitement there, eh? Why not? A baby is a baby isn't it? Or is social status involved? I think so. As to doctors failing/forgetting to clamp their own babies cord immediately, and we think what marvelous genes the doctor's children have, who proves/knows for sure but the nurses in that delivery room to know what is done for some and what is done to others? Why the difference of care and to whom? There is another situation, which I will put up on the Internet, as soon as possible, where a female doctor went public that she gave her child's blood to a cord blood bank. But when written to, to confirm how much, she would not reply. I wondered if she actually existed? What the doctor was doing was using her position as a doctor to encourage others to do the same, clamp early and donate their child's blood to a public cord blood bank. I have seen parents who have done that advocate others follow their lead. Well, if so, if the parents want to be totally honest about such things, they ought to state how much blood was collected from their baby, and how soon the clamping was done, and if the baby was a normal birth or a c-section, too, all is helpful information, if they want to encourage clamping of a child's lifeline before the natural completion of the birth. And how about a factual video of the early clamped babies and those babies the mother left on the placenta cord, for hours, if never clamping the cord until it fell of naturally? Then show a baby getting all its blood, by full-delayed clamping and show the immediate clamped babies side by side, and you will see the visually stronger child to be what will be logical, without such tests, the baby having the longer time on blood transfusion is going to be the healthier baby. Premature babies, too. All babies. Such evidence is being avoided in the current hospital births. A picture of the treatment to the child's umbilical cord is worth a 1000 words. Which of the mothers were informed no harm done by no clamping, and which of the mothers were lied to being told no difference between full-delayed clamping and immediate or clamping within 30 seconds? There will be lies to the mother and deceit which the doctor had a duty to get the facts, check the facts, and be truthful as to his /her intent to clamp a pulsating umbilical cord. When the facts are no harm done by no clamping, ever. The difference in the child's appearance and strength is like night and day. The full delayed clamped babies have a healthy color at birth. In most cases there will be no jaundice if the mother is not drugged or diabetic, or the baby is NOT injected with Vitamin K, Heb B, and other shots preserved in toxic substances, like mercury and aluminum. The natural-birthed, no intervention baby, is stronger. This baby will have a high Apgar score, likely 10, the first time, given a moment for its lungs to expand after the blood correctly runs through them preparing for the air to come externally, logically. It will not need minute to minute observation when it sleeps. It will not be in an oxygen tent. It will be nursing about 1/2 hour after birth. It will not have been stressed with meconium that is excessively unnatural. Meconium caused by the baby fearing for its life not having a gentle birth. Most of the birthing mothers nor the children were NOT respected -- but were, indeed, I say, exploited. Randomized trials of such experiments have proven the mother is none-the-wiser for the truth of the reasons for the testing. Seldom were they given choices of no harm done methods of care to the mother and child. Many mothers are simply conned by lack of factual information to consent to giving their baby's blood. They are told the blood draining is painless to both the mother and the child. True to the mother. A limp struggling child, I would call that painful, certainly stressfu, the child fighting to live. They are told the blood will be discarded if not given to private blood banks. Is that a fact? And if so what does discarded really mean? Who proves the trapped blood in the placenta is "always" burned? As to no pain to take the baby's blood, I am told a shark biting off one's limb is painless too. The side-effects after the fact of blood loss, while painless, may cause death. Doesn't take long or that much blood loss to put the human body into shock. To get the mother to consent to hasty clamping, she is NEVER told no clamping or cutting ever the cord, is harmless to her or the baby. She is led to believe that clamping and cutting the cord are a necessary treatment. That is a lie in most instances. Where is the evidence in each case. If none exist, then it was a bold-faced medical lie. Are we going to have apologies from the medical associations involved in this cover-up? I would think all, directly or indirectly profited as to the spin-offs from turning the other cheek and pretending the problem didn't exist and that knowledge of it didn't exit within the medical circles. It seems from 1801, they all kept a very well organized secret from the greater majority of the public. They included the major press to be mum on what was going on to Mothers, world wide, in most instances. This is, to say the least, if all true, is a 200-year-old medical scam and disgrace. My best guess how long some of the babies were assaulted by unethical doctors and nurses is to the First World War. While mum's the word on this one as to few survivors of those times, we know the doctors were involved in blood transfusions. And there is definite recordings of research and experiments that the use of the umbilical cord stem cell blood from babies was used in transfusions all the way back to 1939, during the Second World War. But the big trend in going public with cord stem cells was not until the 1980's. What really was going on all this time to many of our babies that we trusted to birth in the hospital for the best of care? $400 Million Spin-offs: Then like a good fad, everyone wanted in on the baby-clamping-trend and its spin-off benefits. In Canada, they have intended a $400 million fund for research being set aside. And everyone wants a piece of the pie. I say, budget that for the victims. In the States, it amounts to Billions for cord stem research. I say it will not be the first time the public has been conned. In that Nation, the President is the Honorary President of the American Red Cross. I say, it will not be the first time governments have lied to their taxpayers and deceived them or caused the greater number of persons, the working man, to be the burden-horse. Mothers simply are not sophisticated enough to spot a cells/sales pitch. The expecting mother is simply not educated is actually trained to trust her medical person, blindly, and accepting wishy-washy answers if she does make inquiries, and without a witness to the answers she obtained from her medical person. How many women fear to challenge their doctor today, or to ask for their file to read the comments in it, and to see all the tests and so forth that by law all individuals can do. True in Canada since 1992, and again in 1999 when it was challenged if doctors could deprive any person access to their private medical files. They try, but when it goes to court, they must allow the patient to see their files, and have copies of "anything" in the file, or the complete file. While most BC Hospitals, on the lower mainland, at the maternity wards would not reveal where the blood from placentas go, and the placentas themselves. But, at the Royal Alexander Hospital in Edmonton, Alberta, lab technicians admitted they are given two and three tubes of placenta blood to do the hospital's directed research of the day. Alberta's Health and Wellness Minister, the Hon. Gary Mar , who has a criminal law degree, accepted this as normal medical procedure. This was accepted as acceptable practice by the Alberta College of Physicians and Surgeons, too. No questions asked as to protection of the baby's right to all property rights of its placenta , that I call a blood bag. EDUCATION TO COMPROMISED CHILDREN, THE BURDEN IS TO THE PARENT/S: In most blood taking from the baby's placenta, blood denied the baby unnecessarily, the parents did not know this or give their consent. Many now have children they alone must try to educate. Their children where never-before- in- the- family now had hearing and speech problems, and other learning disorders, as well. Unless the parents were drug users, or alcohol abusers and /or the mother exposed her self to smoke, or the mother accepted drugs during labor, it is not likely bad genes, but drugs and early cord clamping to be the root of the child's problems. Now, 1 in 16 children born, are said to be defective. Of course we can't return them to the manufacturer, like they were tires, or something. We have duty to help the violated children. We have too many children struggling with cancers and tumors from infancy to ignore this situation any longer. Now, the parents want the education costs covered by the government, and rightfully, so. But they will not go back and link associations to hasty clamping and the drugs accepted by the mother during birth, as part of the problem, added to any bad habits of the one or both the parents, including inadequate diet and nutrition. In some situations, the mother, herself, thinks she is all to blame. Here we have women being blamed and they really do not know the in and outs of childbirth, to the delivery of the child. But just look at all the information withheld them, in the health and science classes, false statements made in biology books and then they are told if they do make effort to learn to stay off the Internet, it is not reliable. I know, I went to Babies-Best-Chance, and said if you can't add to the course, can you at least post the internet and make internet available to the poor. But some of the poor cannot read or write. Who are saying that, not to use the Internet, but some nurses, and doctors, and other medical persons. The worst ones have been females, too. I would think they have had a seared conscience of participating in early clamping and offering women drugs during labor. The facts are, I have found more truth available on the Internet then in a doctor's office or by asking a registered-nurse, in most instances. The facts of a compromised child, at birth, is the evidence of the need of revival to any child (see Apgar Score). This test is one of the tests and evidence that the child was forced into tolerance by drugs crossing the placenta, harsh labor contractions, and immediate cord clamping at its birth. There are blood tests, pH blood tests done by immediate clamping but needlessly so. All testing a baby's tolerance to assault. But the tests are more likely trying to be used to excuse medical malpractice, saying, see the blood clamped in the cord is perfect, but the cord was clamped immediately, the child not even taking a breath. Then they say, "We do not know what happened after the test?" Well, the baby didn't get its blood transfused, it may be as simple as that. An Apgar score of 6 or less means the child needs and will likely need, careful monitoring, and I would suggest, through-out its life, and the need of early start in education, like reading and the phonics from infancy on. Many parents never seeing the first test, and after the fact of revival of a compromised child, taken off its umbilical cord, are told their child had a Score of 7. This may well be of the 2nd or 3rd test score after revival from hasty clamping, low blood volume, blood expanders used, and oxygen given the struggling child. A low score means the parents must do early education if the child if he/she is going to be at least average in school, so they should be told to start early and use the Child Development Centers for that early start. The earlier the better, my World Book Encyclopedia encourages even infancy training, to reduce mental impairments. Many stressed fetus in the womb going from bad to worse, were caused by drug administrating. The mothers then feel it is their fault that they accepted drugs, when they actually were set up to accept them. They were told the drugs were safe to themselves and their child, during the government controlled prenatal classes. What they meant was the drugs given during labor would not change the physical appearance of the child, no DNA defects. In fact, during the Biology courses offered in the public school, there is assurance to the students that all drugs, given out by the doctors were adequately tested before given to humans. This is what is written in text books. On the next page they mention thalidomide. It is disgraceful that so few professionals are coming forward or joining associations that support good and healthy practices based in facts of science and truth and in textbooks too. Why should any baby be put through a trial of survival of the fittest tolerance test by any medical person? Nature does not put a tolerance test on most mammals births, including human babies, if no medical persons is there to cause interventions. Nature, repeats itself, time and time again to produce healthy creatures. It is only when man intervenes and pollutes that we see maleformations in nature, and in people. Most human babies would be born without mishap, if the mother were trained in the art of natural birth, in the first place. Therefore, an allowed unassisted birth, in a hospital, would be a win-win situation for all, once the mother, from Grade 9 and up, are educated, in such matters. A good place to start is in female's and male's physical education classes. Also in the health and sciences that have factual and truthful information about all drugs crossing the placenta, and chemicals and alcohol and drugs, and some herbs to avoid, as well. Hospital Unassisted Births: Only the mother and her chosen birth-witnesses would be allowed in the hospital's rented room. This is already being done for the poor in Mexico . There they cannot afford high medical fees. In the States C-sections can cost up to $10,000. In Mexico, the poor are not doing unassisted births because they are informed medical attention and hospital births are harmful. They are going unassisted for economical reasons. To have a normal birth process, in Canada and the States, perhaps in the UK, is now a lost art. But not so in the Netherlands and in other areas of Europe. But in North America, the lost art of babybirths may be largely because of the control of the current publications, in biology, in encyclopedias, to the university training of doctors, and some midwives and doulas, all organized and taught mostly in "active management" and the public being told this is the most appropriate method. Is it? Now, most medically trained persons have never been a witness to a full natural birth, that allows the placenta to be expelled, the umbilical cord to cease to pulsate before tying/clamping and cutting. Why not? This IS natural birth and the completion of it. Most currently trained medical persons have never heard of no clamping or cutting ever, of the umbilical cord, which was done for many home births, prior to the First World War. Or those now trained allege that ignorance, if that is an acceptable excuse for doing illogical and endangering practices, not requiring 'thinking standing on their feet." Never, in our history, has there been such an organized attack on babies, involving the medical associations, societies, colleges and other control groups and many funded by tax dollars, including our medical insurance plans. THEORIES: I present three theories or motives that I maintain are connected to false medical teachings and practices. The most common is the taking of the components of the babies blood , more precious then gold, to all medical fields that get a spin-off from creating a situation, where the child does not start life with opportunities to have optimal health. The medical societies treat illness and disorders but do not actively prevent them or research the likely association and similarities of disorders by looking at drugs , position of birth, clamping of the cord , and vaccinations . All medical associations that I have so far contacted had a duty and a policy statment to protect the public. But most stood back on this issue of childbirth, washing their hands of it. This was true of the politicians, the registered-nurses, and the police, too. I am most surprised at the nurses, for if they stood back and against unreasonable practices, such as hasty clamping as standardized treatment, this would not be done to women and to children. It may be as simple as that. One retired nurse said to be able to communicate with the nurses to have an influence on them, you had to be one of them. But so far, collectively, these medical persons are accepting bad health as normal, with no root causes that it coud be prevented. What I find strange is that those nurses when they witnessed one doctor doing hasty clamping and another full delayed, asked no questions and did no personal research. Some, obviously did in-between-clamping, 30 seconds, or less then 3 minutes, not waiting for all pulsation to stop. None questioned which of the timing of clamping required the most need to revive a child, and could they not have done so, while the child remained on its life-line? We must question why the medical insurance companies are paying for this whole scheme of events as a nice package of about $500 dollars per doctor for a c-section or normal birth, for the actual delivery. BIG BUSINESS IS REPEAT BUSINESS: Trillions of dollars are to be made by repeat bad medical malpractice, including spin-offs to legal representatives, who go for settlements of a civil nature, in the millions of dollars . Many law firms take the cases, of immediate physical damages and yet are to represented the okay babies, Constitutionally deprived of their placenta cord blood by hasty clamping, and where the blood went, no one is saying. Hasty clamping is generally followed by the evidence of the amount of blood in the placenta being quickly disposed of, and no records kept on the infant's personal medical chart. How come? Then there is the failure of Crown Counsels, and police, and medical persons, officers of the justice system, and in some cases, even the parents -- all failing to bring the matter to criminal court, as criminal violation to the Constitutional and Charter Protection to all persons, regardless of age. There is not sufficient advocacy for the child. The criminal court is likely the only place to bring about universal changes as to the silence and secret internal debate revealed on this web site, and known to many others. Criminal medical assault has intent and in most medical situations, false reasoning to justify an unnecessary treatment to a person. Most parents have never consented to hasty clamping on their child's still functioning organ. Most parents never had a chance to be informed that all drugs offered the birthing mother during labor quickly cross the placenta and go into the baby's blood stream and can poison any cell, internally, and likely the brain tissues. The brain being the control unit for all other functions, even breathing. So now we have one more likely reason for SIDS, Sudden Infant Death Syndrome. Even my 1979 World Book Encyclopedia has revealed that minor brain cell damage, and identify birth injury, can cause SIDS. The parents are not educated to be able to make protective and informed choices. It may be as simple as that, plus being misinformed and being lied to when they do make inquiries to their "trusted" medical person. Their trust was breached by most of the medical persons following harmful practices and teachings, without "thinking on their feet." The duty, by all, being to the child to do no harm. BLIND TRUST TO MEDICAL CORPORATIONS: What I have observed is the exploitation of the blind trust the mother and the father has to the medical person. The parents are not educated on this issue of the child's birth. The birth of the child left to be in the hands of the "expert." But is the expert ethically and competently trained? Who trained them? What are the philosophies and the back ground of the medical teachers behind all of this? Who are they, really? Did they ever study ethics and the law? Did they come from the same bunch as the Bin Ladens, sneak attack on the innocent? Is this an attack on our medical care programmes, high costs to the over-burdened tax payers? Is criminal Big Business Corporations involved? What about democracy and human rights? What is their background to have the positions they do have? What are their economic or corporation share interests, besides their work in medicine and research? If the medical persons sat on a board to direct immediate cord clamping, did they sit on other advisory boards that used the child's deprived blood? Is there conflict of interest, financial interests, as to policies directed in the education of the nurses and doctors and other medical persons, today? Will we ever investigate to find the answers? Do we really want answers? From my research, I observed, many medical persons are not adequately trained. That may be by cunning and deceitful intent by those in charge of the medical person's training. Is that intentional? Do those in control intimidate the students? The facts are the Medical Students actually have to be told they do not have to do anything against their conscience. Their duty as a "professional" was to know the facts of science, not plead this is all I knew or was trained. Each ought to have had some training in the Constitution and the Charter of Rights and not assume a medical license can do just anything to a person's body. Each medical person ought to have known more. They had the best chance and means to do the medical research and on this issue it dates back to 1800's NOT to clamp the cord before it ceased to pulsate, naturally. They had an implied duty to do so. More so, to do research, then the average lay person. Are the children, many of them now adults, inferior persons for the assault on their bodies, as babies. NO. They have been wrongfully violated persons. Were babies born without limbs inferior humans? NO. They are 100 percent human beings, but less then whole. Many struggled after assaults imposed during childbirth. I would say their learning is best described as "painful" if not expensive. Compensation to them is long over-due. In some situations, the parents had to sacrifice, more so for a medically damaged child, and not so other children, chosen or privileged or spared from a similar assault. Would the odds every other child be a fair statement as to the sparing and the assaulting? On reflection of growing up remembering the students during the War Years, I think that is a safe observation. How would the doctors choose the next victim, if every other child could be assaulted by the deprivation of blood and oxygen? Simple. Observation. Is the current child well, or sickly? Next victim would be what is known. A theory, but do your own investigations, start asking mother's questions, were you flat on your back, your vagina cut, forceps used, drugs offered and accepted, and hasty clamping...was the child detached from the cord seconds of birth? The answers will give the likely cause of early deaths of children, sickness, night and day mix-ups, food sensititivies, allergies, lung problems, and so forth. Few teachers, when dealing with hyper children, or slow learners, poor concentrating children, easily forgetting children, will suggest to the mother and the father, review the birth process, and go get the medical records. Legally, those medical records of the child should not be destroyed until the child is an adult and gives consent. No medical records should ever be destroyed without the consent of the person that the records were made on. That is where a Medical Bill of Rights can come into this issue of medical concerns. EDUCATION AND THE IMPAIRED CHILD: Involved in the side-effects of bad medical practice is the government's control of funding as to whose child gets paid-for-education assistance, that extra help, all the way to University and a Degree. The facts are there is NO funding for okay babies with latent learning disorders. They may not be able to read, write or spell, but they are okay babies. This if they can physically move okay, they look well, and can get an IQ testing of at least 50. It is the IQ results that determine the amount of funding, if any will be provided. What a nice tidy package. We have a well planned organized government system here for okay children not expecting to get 80 percent in their studies, and not helped to do so, either. The attitude I have found is, they can always dig a ditch. The females can always be mothers. Many of these medically-caused "average" children, the okay children will have the lower paying jobs. So, do we have intended, at birth, discrimination as to the future abilities to the persons so damaged to equally compete for careers and the job market? They simply, in most instances, are put out of competition. They are not likely to rise up the social ladder of leadership, nor get the top-notch paying jobs. Minimum wage is their fate, welfare, and in some cases, for those who do not accept honesty is the best policy, no harm to others, often governed by spiritual instruction, find their way to care in prisons. Prisons become their security for 3 meals a day, clean clothes, and a clean environment, in most Democratic countries. If this medical malpractice is a criminal matter, which I believe it is, every person not given the chance for optimal health, as nature intended them to have, have a right to compensation. Then, in that case, the individual assets of all the members of the various associations and societies that went along and did nothing, said nothing, like a crowd watching the bullies beat the hide off another, and felt they were not actually doing it, did nothing to stop it, or go for help, so are not responsible, may be responsible, collectively and severely, and their assets held for victims. Why? In theory, they failed to protect the public, and had a duty to speak up. All doctors and medical persons have a duty to report assault on children. Even more so, when this matter was brought to their attention, and they did not check if any follow-up for an immediate correction and interventions were being made. They left it in limbo, and so did the Federal and Provincial Governments, too. That was true in Canada, it is true in the States too, and elsewhere. Who all may be implicated, if my theory of accountability is correct? It could be right down to the government's file clerk or the staff at the various Colleges, having knowledge nothing was being done as to a medical malpractice going on, with no investigations why it was being allowed to "continue." And, no public warnings or how the public can best protect itself from false medical practices now approved and being trained to the up-coming medical persons, from the ambulance medic to the surgeon. So where does the Media come in the picture? One Justice of the Peace, in Vancouver, BC. Canada, not wanting me to bring this issue before him, stated, "Oh, don't come to me." This matter must go to the press. Well, would the main stream press media deal with this issue? NO. Not the Vancouver Sun or Province Papers. They are owned by Big Chain Corporations. Not even a letter under 200 words would be published on this issue, dissenting to a story on cord blood banking. What I was told as to the clue why the big media will not do a story on this cord blood robbing from babies is that the major news media policy claim a medical story cannot be released by the press until a medical association or corporation gives the release. Wow, that is power over our health, eh? This undertaking or understanding is not spoken about to the public. Now is that really for the protection of the public or it is a cover-up of wrongful medical practices and saving face of the criminal medical Bin Ladens behind it. Nor, would the government controlled radio and television, like CBC, put their own investigative reporter on this story, when I sent them sources of information for them to do their own research, if mine was not acceptable to them. Even CBC's Ombudsman for fair reporting failed to investigage this issue. They gave no warning to the public, but only supported that taking the baby's blood was a good thing for society, or implied for the child. What was implied was 'be damned to the rights of the newborn citizen', exploited for its blood, not to have its full benefits during or soon after birth, of full blood transfusion. C-section babies being clamped, the cord cut, then the baby taken out and helped to breathe, consequently, many such have IRDS. But the lung problems are associated to the baby being said to be premature not because of the immediate cord clamping and the lungs were not having blood circulated through them, and the lungs expanded for air, when clamped. In that case, if criminal liability is proved, and while it will take some time, city by city, hospital by hospital, nurse by nurse, doctor by doctor, lab technician by lab technician, College by College, associations and societies involved in the medical fields, I would think, "all" those failing in their duty to protect all members of the public, babies included, will, hopefully, have their day of judgment with its consequences. I do not know if that will be on Planet Earth, or in another dimension. For now we are dealing strictly in the conscience of those medical persons who do know what is going on, but have failed in their duties to come forward to stop medical malpractice, in most instances. When confronted with these issues, many professional in the medical field "act" surprised. Particularly, the nurses, who collectively, have power to stop participating in bad medical practices, at least so their standards direct, if followed. How could they go into assisting the delivery of babies and NOT notice some doctors did hasty clamping, and some did delayed, and failed to observe which child was stronger? How could they not read a variety of books, from the present to the past? Doctors included and other medics taking child-emergency delivery courses, or directed to read the Chapters in the book. This read your own Chapter, lets off the First Aid Instructors, off the hook? Or does it? Surely, they knew the treatment to the child, and correct treatment or the failure of correct treatment is the difference of a healthy child or an impaired one, but judged "okay" if it lived? Had they no perception of warning they were stopping the infant's circulation system by a clamp when the umbilical cord was still pulsating? Could they not confirm the reasons to clamp by their supervisor? Were their supervisors teaching without concern of truth and facts? Had they no means to medical libraires? Did they know how to use them? OUR OFFICERS OF THE JUSTICE SYSTEM -- WHERE ARE THEY ON THIS ONE? There is the matter of the law firms failing to assist. Many lawyers who were informed apparently had their brains stunned of the facts of what is going on. They did nothing AND wanted to do nothing. Even feminists in charge of discrimination to women groups, turned their back on this issue. Why? Likely, they did not want to commit suicide by challenging the medical pros. Maybe some were NOT mothers, and felt careers were more important and equality of pay. But not mother-hood, an unpaid position in our society, unless of course, one is a mother on welfare benefits, and the more children she has, the better the security. I say, those that stepped back, rather then forward, had no time, ought to be identified, firm by firm, as well. One lawyer, in Fort St. John, BC, Canada, would not allow for a witness, a reporter, to be present in what he was going to advise, charging about $500 for an unwritten opinion how to deal with this issue. The lawyer cancelled the meeting, rather then to allow a witness to any options how to appeal to the Courts, if anything could be done. They just did not want, it appears, to deal with professionals, on general medical practice and policies not there, in reality, to protect the public. They only wanted civil means for immediate physical damages, not to put medical executives in jail. After all, the lawyers would be dealing with nice ladies and gentlemen, respected by all of society. Just like nice people were involved in the cover-up of contaminated and untested blood used by the Red Cross. NO criminal prosecution, as to the pain and short-changed life-length of contaminated blood victims. But some Federal financial compensation was paid to the victims or their families, after a long lengthy struggle for justice. The law firms gave no hope to change the medical practices in favor of a Medical Bill of Rights that this would NOT happen again, internal debates, that should have been made public, 200 years ago. But for some reasons, today, is the common practice of hasty clamping and the use of drugs. Both, now really out of hand. The medical associations had 200 years of practice of stressing babies' tolerances to maximum and saying nothing of the babies that died. They were aware of the possibilities of the death of babies by hasty clamping. Yet, NO investigation if the death of child followed the care of a government approved and "licensed" medical person or persons. The license to practice was their ticket out of jail or to escape individual accountability for financial contribution to their victims and not just medical malpractice insurance picking up the tab. Would medical malpractice not want to go after individual's for criminal medical malpractice? I think so, just like car insurance companies go after criminal driving charges and seek damages from the individual, for recovery they paid to their victims. But, the justice system, and the political system have failed to investigate the possibility of organized medical malpractice. In doing so, those involved likely put aside Rule of Law. Such rule of law, internationally, does not allow any individual to be excused of criminal liability and consequences. Anarchy and Threat to Democracy: When lawyers, our justice officers, fail to investigate the medical associations and executives, they have, in essence, allowed anarchy within professional groups to ignore criminal law, fundamental law, and constitution law. This is a threat to democracy. They failed as ministers of the justice system, and may have considered some women and children as frivolous subjects. And, that is part of their Oath, when called to the Bar, to be a minister of the justice system, not to take on any frivolous case. The facts are we do not have any babies to spare. Women and babies are not frivolous persons. No person should be denied access to the court to bring Laying of Information for an investigation, and possibly leading to private criminal prosecution of those having a duty to protect the public and have failed to do so. Thinking only is not a substitute for Responsible Action to stop injustices going unopposed. This site does encourage and does permit individuality, freedom of expression, views on philosophy, and personal conclusions based on personal experience and research. All information will be continually improved and/or be added to. All comments, are most welcome. Please contact the author at these email addresses: donna@123babybirth.com or My mailing address is: Donna Young, Protect Babies, Box 504, Dawson Creek, BC V1G 4H4 Canada. I also recommend a very good medical web site:
If this web site has assisted you to make an "informed" decision, or to help an expecting mother to be on guard to protect herself and the baby, or to have you more alert as to the deception now going on and was true of corruption in the past, please consider a donation of any amount. Visa Payments can be made by calling: Donna at (250) 782-9223) or Money Orders may be sent to Donna, Protect Babies, Box 504, Dawson Creek, BC V1G 4H4 Canada Please feel free to share any information from this web site but please give reference to its web address: www.123babybirth.com a mirror web site is also at: http:// www.pris.ca/ProtectBabies/ All mentioned web sites can be copied and pasted for sending to others, please give source of information credits to this web site. Thank you for coming to 123babybirth.
 Please send your comments to . This document was updated 6/1/02. |