In recent years, however, a school of thought that is opposed to this tradition has emerged.Īccording to this opposing view, birth is seen from the standpoint of the foetus, and it is claimed that clamping the cord while it is still pulsating could be harmful to the newborn. The authors analyzed all these aspect in the Italian legislative framework, reaching the conclusion that Lotus Birth is inadvisable from both the scientific and logical/rational points of view.Ĭutting the umbilical cord is a medical act which – first by tradition and then on scientific bases – is routinely implemented in obstetric centres in all western countries. Lastly, a proper conservation of the embryonic adnexa is very difficult and includes problems of a hygiene/health, infectivological and medico-legal nature. Moreover, from the legal standpoint, there is no uniform position on the question of whether the placenta belongs to the mother or to the newborn.
However, it should be pointed out that histopathological study of the placenta is increasingly being requested in order to investigate problems of an infective nature or dysmaturity affecting the foetus, and situations of risk affecting the mother. Supporters of such a procedure claim that the newborn is better perfused, endowed with a more robust immune system and “less stressed”. The first reported cases of Lotus Birth date back to 2004 in Australia. The term “Lotus Birth” identifies the practice of not cutting the umbilical cord and of leaving the placenta attached to the newborn after its expulsion until it detaches spontaneously, which generally occurs 3–10 days after birth.
0 kommentar(er)
