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?