Drugging Pregnant Mothers, Followed by Early Infant Umbilical Cord Clamping -- It Seldom, If Ever, Needs to be Done. www.lotusbirth.com

Drugging Mothers, Umbilical cord clamping, it seldom, if ever, needs to be done. WHO'S PROTECTING BABY, THE NEWBORN CITIZEN? by Donna Young, President, Natural Birth Education. (Revised, February 20, 2004). ( www.lotusbirth.com/doc/FEB2003Lotusbirth-0.htm ) Table of Contents for easier reading is available at: www.lotusbirth.com/_cont260.htm

WHEN WE PROTECT THE BABY , AT BIRTH,THE FAMILY'S PRIVACY TO THEIR DNA GENETIC CODE IS PROTECTED, TOO.

This web site allows you to learn about and consider the Pioneer's Secret of Child Birth now called the Lotus Birth for the only assurance your baby is protected from unnecessary placental blood deprivation that is caused by immediate and early umbilical cord clamping, the latter is about 30-seconds clamping. It is not uncommon for a drugged babies cord to pulsate up to 20 minutes or a child with a compressed cord to pulsate that long. A normal pulsation can be 5 minutes and longer. Wise and competently trained doctors do not clamp the cord whether pulsating or not for a good 12 minutes.

Can c-section babies be removed from the womb intact with their umbilical cords and placenta not clamped? Yes. It is the legal right for the parents to contract that this be done. Otherwise, there may be endangering of their baby. If the doctor premeditates to persist, this may be a criminal act of using policies and training to alibi endangering the child. This is true for any child where a doctor has been trained to endanger a child by early umbilical cord clamping. Policies should be reported as dangerous to those that made the policies, in the first place. Generally, it is the Obstetricians and Gyncologists that have made endangering policies directing immediate cord clamping on all babies.

The medical facts of science and medicine are only if the cord tore or for placenta previa is there an immediate medical need and urgency to interfere with the baby's cord being clamped. In rare incidence, such as these, the remedy is quick correction to minimize deprived oxygenated blood, volume and pressure. (See Chow-case-law, this web site).

Any clamped umbilical cord that was still pulsating is an early clamped cord. Or, if the cord is seen drained white it may be medical malpractice of the doctor holding the baby too high, as in a c-section, holding the baby chest high to the surgeon; or holding the drugged and baby too low of the birth canal. This can cause hardship of the heart to pump the blood back into the placenta for the gas exchange of carbon dioxide for fresh oxygen.

Any child not breathing can be revived where is, how is, yet attached to their umbilical cord. If the heart beats again, so will the flow of the blood through the cord continue. Leave it alone. When in doubt go with Natural birth. Just keep the mother and the child warm and dry.

OPINIONS VERSE OBSERVABLE MEDICAL FACTS AND SCIENCE FOR ANY PLACENTA BIRTH MAMMAL:

Many medical persons say they are confused about the timing of the clamping of the cord. Or, that there are many opinions. The facts can be seen by weighing the placenta and extracting the blood from it that was deprived the child. Justification must be made why a functioning organ was stopped by a clamp or hand holding or tying off the cord before the placenta was naturally born, the completion of the child's birth. Fears of this happening or such and such a fear are not facts of medical need. Only if the cord tore or for placenta previa need a cord be clamped for the benefit of the child, with immediate correction of anemic conditions caused the child.

MOTIVES IN FALSE MEDICAL P0LICIES TO TRAIN DOCTORS TO DO EARLY UMBILICAL CORD CLAMPING:

The motive in the training of current doctors is probably linked to harvesting the placenta for valuable nutrients and hormones and stem cells trapped in the placenta. The early umbilical cord clamping is highly unethical, if not criminal to harvest the nutrients and hormones and sell them to the highest bidder. The duty is to protect the baby who cannot give informed consent. The placenta blood belongs inside the baby and should not be given to others. The baby is too small and unprotected to donate blood to another's cause or need.

The selling of the baby's placenta and the placenta blood trapped in it has been done mostly without informed parental consent. The institutions have parents sign a form for appropriate discarding of the placenta. What does that mean?! That is not informed consent to give up the hormones and the genetic information in any one cell. Doctors may think if they send home a living mother and child, they did their duty. Not so if there was a breach of trust in the performance of their duty. This applies to the duty of the hospital's administration, ethics committees and the nurses and their profession of best practice possible, least risk of harm.

CONSTITUTIONAL, CIVIL AND CRIMINAL CODE VIOLATIONS:

It is a violation of duty if the child was not properly protected and truth in the recording of the facts was not placed in the child's own medical files. All treatment and drugs, including brand and amount of dosage should be placed in the mother's files. The facts are important as all drugs cross the placenta and residual and trace ingredients and metals can be found in the placenta tissues, if checked for, and in the urine samples and pH testings of both the mother and the child.

There may be concealed motive for missing information on the birth of the child and care of the child's placenta and umbilical cord clamping, as well as the other services given and tests taken. Civil actions may be necessary if the information is not placed immediately in the child's own medical files and copies given the mother before she leaves the birth center. It is a criminal offense to destroy evidence by any person or persons. This duty not to destroy evidence does not exclude medical persons, and even the nurses.

The motive of harvesting the placenta and the nutrients of blood trapped in the placenta unknown by most parents have endangered their baby or babies to internal injuries that will be in most cases, latent in discovery. It is imperative to keep all details of the child's birth and the obligation of the hospital and its administration is to assure of the rights of the mother and the child as to their duty to them both.

NATURAL BIRTH VERSE ACTIVE MANAGEMENT:

No baby is safe in active management, not the premature, the c-section or the full term baby. All babies can benefit from a a natural birth and a birth contract what cannot be done to the mother or to the child. All mothers can contract not to clamp or cut the cord at all. This is the Lotus Birth. In the olden days, the placenta was simply put in a diaper and allowed to fall off in a day or two after birth. There were "no cord infections and the baby got all the blood from the placenta and had healthy immunities. Not so today. Why not? Think about it. Would you rather have a healthy baby, not one harvested for its precious components of blood, particularly the stem cells and to have the child umbilical cord off naturally in two days? Or, would you prefer to nurse back a medically caused sick baby, often injected with "stuff" soon after birth, while the child was blood deprived, anemic and with low immunities by that fact? The sick baby will needs its mother to fight cord infections from five days to up to 15 days by a cut cord?

There is also a Petition link provided that rejects "active management" in favor of natural birth education and practice.

Note: PETITION

www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/102580814

Please ask this site to have a Medical Alert Petition Site: petitions@earth.case2.com

We need support, Internationally, to help Canada correct or investigate present training of all medical persons who will or intend to be at a mother's birth.

We need support for informed choices, of both parents, that our babies are not being harvested by methods of Active Management.

MOTIVE OF EARLY UMBILICAL CORD CLAMPING:

The babies who are being blood volume and pressure deprived, thus hormone and nutrient harvested by early umbilical cord clamping are more vulnerable to have low immunities. That is logical. The babies are frequently sick with ear infections, colds and other disorders. The internal disorders are often latent in discovery. They are internal injuries and the degree of injury will be like a roll of the dice. All internal injuries to the child caused by hasty clamping and drug related are preventable. Premature babies have more stem cells then do a full term, so are prime to be selected for early cord clamping. C-section babies are larger babies and will survive the assault of early cord clamping and most full term babies...but all early clamped babies were made weaker. This is when they were intended by natural design to have had full blood transfused from the placenta by their heart (the throbbing of the cord is the heart beat) into the expanding lungs. All babies so early clamped are endangered to lung problems for lack of blood absorbing the water fluid in the lungs and to carry the oxygen by the red (iron-rich) blood cells. They are subjected to other internal disorders, including the number one cause of a 900 percent increase in autistic children and those with holes in their heart. It is just logical low blood volume and pressured babies will have problems of some nature - and it "is" known to be linked to doctors trained to accommodate blood harvesting by doing early umbilical cord clamping. The policies are there to give the doctors an alibi not to be charged with criminal assault and the nurses from aiding in failing to put in a fault report on the doctors. They make no report on the condition of the cord when clamped and the amount of blood later drained from the placenta. Why not. That takes cooperation of concealment, too, by the hospitals lab and the administration and ethics board of most hospitals.

CHECK OUT THE INCREASE OF INTERNAL DISORDERS AND THE YOUNG AGES OF THE AFFLICTED:

Some babies are being discovered with muscle disorders, as young as 13 months, diagnosed with MS. Some children, as young as 13, have thyroid problems. Often the thyroid problems are related to the drugs given the mother during labor, such as oxytocin. Oxytocin is often given without informed consent on the pretense it stops bleeding. Oxytocin frequently contains an ingredient chlorobutanol that is alleged to cause the latent thyroid problems in either the mother or the child, or both.

Many babies have been wrongfully deprived of their fullest genius potential. The children are now average to below average achieving children. They struggle to learn. Learning is longer and harder for them. It is a fact of research and studies of reduced abilities in American children. A concern was raised back in the 1960's, and shared publicly, in the book, The Magical Child, written in the 1970's, by an educator, Joseph Chilton Pearce.

In 1997, more concerns were taken to developing nations. This was an appeal for them NOT to copy the maternity practices of North American, by Doris Haire. She identified drugs and and early cord clamping, as did the study by Dr. W. B. Windle, mentioned by Pearce. Doris Haire's appeal to the developing nations, Birth Without Borders, 1997, link is www.lotusbirth.com/doc/FEB2003Lotusbirth-499.htm .

The present is the key to the past of the trends and traditions kept from most of the knowledge of the masses. But likely the harvesting of babies has gone back to the discovery of the blood typing, 1901. But it took until the modern state of art of access to information on the internet for the masses to be able to communicate and share information.

It took generations to destroy values ethics of religion, and desensitize many of our medical doctors for them to now be in the majority of harvesting babies by policies. These policies, put out by the experts, (ACOG and SOGC) were and some still are boldly directing, without good cause, immediate umbilical cord clamping on "all" babies.

Only the wise could prevent it, the planned assault, done voluntarily by the doctor and/or the nurse wielding the weapon. Those with inside information, who did not have blind trust of their medical person(s) attending their baby's birth, could request they not do that. Most were honoured by that request, if they knew to ask no clamping on the pulsating and functioning umbilical cord. Others, though they requested, had their directives ignored for frivolous reasons, the medical person lying of a made-up excuse to clamp a pulsating cord, like "fear of the mother bleeding." Why the false reason to justify a clamping of the cord.

The reason is an alibi, to tell in the Courts, if they must. They had to have an excuse, so they made up a fear that something terrible was likely to happen to the mother. The alibi is then the cure was clamping the functioning umbilical cord, at the risk to the child going into shock. Of course they have their oxygen tanks. But oxygen alone will not revive a child shy of 20 to 50 percent total blood volume. The facts of that were stated in the damages of the Chow-case-law, Ontario, Canada, handled by Sommers and Roth.

The child not having immediate blood volume and pressure replaced, did survive, but only after the transfusion of blood was adequate.The child lives, who was caused to be anemic, as being blind, deaf, and paralyzed. His anemia was caused by his blood being trapped in the placenta, His cost of care, so not to be institutionalized or given up to the Province to raise, and to stay with his mother, will be to the taxpayers in higher medical fees for services. This is logical to be passed on, in medical civil suits, this one netting over $8 million dollars.

Another child with his circulation interrupted, too, the Ing-Case-Law, cost $14 million dollars, also of the Ontario Province. Neither of these Court Awards stopped the incompetent training of doctors. As to hasty clamping, a common practice, Ontario has two cord stem cell blood banks. They also have the highest budget sought for autistic children, $500 Million. The Province also had their students tested, and found over 65 percent could not pass a standard achievement test. In British Columbia, there is one cord stem cell blood bank. Alberta University also has a private stem cell blood bank that operates from its campus.

FEARS OF THE MOTHER BLEEDING, IS IT A LOGICAL EXCUSE TO BE ACCEPTED BY THE COURTS, AS JUSTIFIED?

The excuse is not justified by lack of evidence. Was the mother bleeding? No. Was there any danger if you clamped the pulsating cord, leaving the placenta full of blood, caused a possible danger to the mother? Yes. Was that danger the risk of the placenta then leaking with pressure of continued contractions on the womb? Yes. Then how did early clamping for a fear, not present, improve the situation, rather then allow nature to take its course, and the child have all the blood being transfused into their expanding lungs? "It could not improve either the mother's situation, if true a risk of bleeding was factual; the placenta, yet in the womb. Bleeding is generally "after" the placenta is expelled.

The removal of the baby from his/her lifeline jeopardized both. Where the situation was in home birth, the baby was at risk of the medical person not able to do a vein to vein transfusion from the cut vein back into the baby through. What transfusions skills does a midwife have, or registered nurse, or medic if they are told to clamp the pulsating cord? Giving back an anemic child back his her blood because of 50 percent blood deprivation is the only way to prevent shock or disease.. Oxygen alone will not keep the child alive. Anemia can be caused by blood loss or deprivation, as this would be the case. This would be by threat to the child of up to 50 percent total blood volume deprivation. (Facts of that possibility are in the reasons for judgement in the Chow case-law , Ontario, Canada, by Sommers and Roth).

Judges nor juries are stupid. This under-the-table directives, being used in Canada and in the United States were being used by a Medical female Doctor in Florida, May 2003; and by two midwives in Ontario, Canada, in the month of June 2003, plus a student.

The author or teacher of directing immediate cord clamping by a false fear has not been, identified, so far. Nor, has any clinical study to make this a standard of policy and care imposed been found. This was a surprise pressure placed on the women to consent on early clamping for the fear put on her, her life was in danger, when that was not a fact.

What consent was given was not informed consent. This is falsehood one might expect an element of surprise assault to be used by an Terrorist. They are sweet to you as they are plotting to deceive you and exploit you. Terrorists pull surprise assaults that gives their victims no means of being prepared to defend themselves.

So do we have terrorists or those not truly dealing fairly that our Canadian children can be the best that they can be? Or, is the motive simply injury for personal profit, and the hope to hit the jackpot that this child's blood is valued for one single unit of stem cell blood to fetch $30,000, or at the most another $150.00 extra billing fee, for just plain ordinary "white" blood?

You be the judge as you begin your own quest and questions on this issue of secrecy on the timing of the clamping of the cord. The place to start is asking about the storage of the placentas at each hospital. Who picks them up? Are they being sold or burned?

NEW INEXPERIENCED PARENTS, NAIVE, AND TRUSTING, ARE THE MOST VULNERABLE TO THEIR BABY EXPLOITED:

The only true way an inexperienced mother and father can protect their child without the medical persons taking vengeance by getting even if the parents don't play along with donating their baby's blood is to birth unassisted in the safety and the security of their own home, wisely, unassisted. Why?

Because too many breaches of trust have been involved registered-nurse-midwives as well as doctors. This is whether this has been a home birth or at a medical center. More serious, the medical persons can "accidently" do harm to the mother during the birth of the child. One recent example Oct-November 2003, happened to an inexperienced mother. She was birthing on the lower coast of Vancouver and was wise to the clamping, and refused early clamping to her baby.

The medical persons had the baby pushed back into her womb for a face up birth presentation. This is not a method of clinical practice to twist and shove the baby back into the womb for a mere face up birth position. The mother is now fighting for her life of infections to the womb. She has already had to have a colotomy.

This is not the first situation of militancy for power of control over the mother birthing and the control of the quality of life of the child or the mother. The militancy of the medical doctors, today, is compliance, and no questions, blind trust. The organization of no information is right into the prenatal classes run by the nurses, who are told they cannot have guest speakers, nor can add or subtract from their information. When mothers speak about early clamping and the right to not having that, the nurses pretend they have never heard of not clamping the cord.

In many situations, after "active management" the mother and the newborn child are lucky to be spared their lives. Many women think that revival to them both, after drugs were used on them, they would surely have died had they not had an expert attend their birth. The facts, are to the contrary. The evidence for least interventions are to natural births, when babies come of their own time, the mother rested in her own home, babies coming after the mother is rested, usually in the early morning hours.

Surely, the women if educated on natural birth, and knows how to avoid active management as her right to contract against, can do less risk for going with nature care -- warm water births, and she or her spouse catch their own baby.

This is because it is known without intervention, 93 to 95 percent of births are without incident. Interventions do cause most of the mishaps: drugs, false birth position, and fear of the mother in a environment she does not know the people or their intent to her or her baby.

The system is not trust worthy. It never was. It has always been based around drugs, which manipulate the birth to the staff and/or the doctors busy time schedule. Inductions of labor are unsafe.

The research I have read on experiments of birth would, in most cases, I doubt that one could find the mothers available to question them what information they had to make an informed decision. And if they would make a difference decision, today, with more information?

The truth of informed consent of what is done to her person or her baby's is not based on all information given. For example women asked if they want 30 second cord clamping or immediate and never told about no clamping of the cord at all. (See Judith S. Mercers clinical study -- this was believed a controlled clinical study to find the least amount of time a child may survive if early clamped without revival of blood transfusion or oxygen. Judith was NOT allowed to even suggest full delayed or no clamping. That is a biased and controlled clinical study, which was contrary to Judith's own principles that natural is best, no interventions by man in the timing of the clamping of the cord.

Evidence-based clinical studies need unbiased questioning of those who had agreed to be in the study. Did they have all risks known and all options known? Most it is believed did not. What we have is medical persons agreeing to alibi the study and make a report, that is controlled and not released to the public, in most instances, or copies researched by the Health Care services governing the Nation. The trouble is the clinical studies are done in one Country then used as a clinical study and practice imposed as a policy on the members of the public, at large. The studies are used as alibis for any medical person using the study as a defense. Not necessary the training he or she received to become a licensed person in the State, Province or Territory, they became licensed in. The studies are made available as alibis and defense, and are used to prevent the Colleges of Physicians and Surgeons to investigate a trend imposed on the public, and for dubious reasons.

An example of a opinion, or study put into a Data base, is MDConsult, an American Medical site, and used by the College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia. There, is a report by Dr. Gabbes, that directed it was okay for the convenience of the doctor to clamp the child's lifeline, as his/her own convenience. He boldly stated, the amount of blood, in most instances, was not of importance. Tell that to the Michael Chow, living blind, deaf, and paralyzed, after immediate cord clamping caused him to be anemic by 50 percent.

When a medical doctor was reported for doing immediate cord clamping on all c-sectioned babies, the CPS-BC would not investigate the training of the doctor, stating he had a defense in this data base of this American doctor's opinion, not important, doctors own choice of convenience.

No where was the well-being of the child mentioned; nor the right of the parents to have been informed no clamping of the cord is necessary, and not a medical need, unless the cord tore or for placenta previa. The cord, again, need not be clamped at all, ever. That is the "pioneer" Lotus Birth - a right of choice to all mothers, and best put into a written and Signed Contract.

No baby has to donate blood and cannot legally be forced to do so. The duty is to protect the child's legal rights of equal security and protection by our Nation's Laws. Policies of the hospitals, medical persons cannot usurp the Nation's laws of duty of care to another.

The sacrifice of blood was done once and for all. You want sacrificed blood, then go to the Cross, if you believe in the Christian faith. That blood was voluntarily given...not so the baby's blood. The policy for who can donate blood is: The person must be age 17, over 110 pounds, and known to be in good health. Immediate cord clamping does not allow for examination of the baby for good health.

So do not allow any doctor or nurse or midwife to clamp a baby's pulsating cord for dubious reasons, other then the cord tore or for placenta previa. And do have a video of your child's birth if having a licensed medical person in attendance. They cannot stop a birth witness or a photographer being present.

This is because educational films are in the policy of the medical professions. And birth is natural and the medical persons are not needed, again in 93 to 95 percent of most births. Be in control for a gentle birth of natural birth. Become alert and aware of your rights and protect yourself and your baby.

What do you know about your doctor? Ask for recommendations if you can. Ask about the most recent birth of the doctor you are now going to.

What recommendations can the medical person get from the mother who he / she just delivered their child, on the care and treatment and the use of : drugs, position of birth, and the timing of the clamping of the cord.

If they cannot answer a question directly and only say, they follow policy...ask him what right you have to say no to that policy, and what is it?

It is best to read the directions he learned, or the textbook he studied from or refers to. Most libraries can bring the book in, at no charge. Have the medical person give you the references and passage of care and treatment to the child's umbilical cord, and does that sound logical to you. Would it sound reasonable to a judge if you requested there were no interventions?

This discussion on the cord issue should be well in advance, of the child's birth. This is so you can find another doctor, or make provisions to birth unassisted, with another professional person. But if none can be found to put you at ease, they will avoid active management, then trust in yourself to become informed and to know most births are without events, 93 to 95 percent of normal births.

Do not believe the medical person(s), if they say , "Well, I wouldn't clamp the cord on your baby."

If they did it to others, they will treat you the same and without respect. They look and expect naive women who busy career persons, too busy to do research. They expect the first time mother to be so excited at being pregnant and in fear, they will listen without independent research, everything they say, and will do it blindly. And, this is true of their spouses, equally uneducated on birth matters.

Sharing this information, when it ought to have explained, appropriately, when you were knee high, is like trying to prevent rapes to women, who do not understand the lurking dangers forewarned by the women, who have had such an attack.

Active management "is" in most instances an attack on the woman's body and the child's. In fact, Active Management is described as the Rape of the Twentieth Century, by Leilah McCracken. (See her web site at Birthlove.com). But warning women to research on natural birth education, warm water births, no drugs and no clamping of the cord is like meeting, by the women, themselves, a political blockage...hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil of the sacred Docs.

The facts are women who have never been raped find it hard to understand what others feel, who have. It is the same in the experience of child birth. Those not experience birth, will listen until they themselves experience the breach of trust of "active management" not having the best information available what natural birth is, and what it is NOT. The simple message is, you do not need doctors, or midwives, for natural birth, in most instances. You can have them available, in another room, but you, CAN contract for a Hand's Off birth. The contract, signed is a waiver. And, only you the mother can change your mind for something offered, or can refuse it. It is as simple as that. It is confirmed in Law, such as in the UK, where a woman sued for a c-section imposed on her. The Supreme court ruled NOT even the Judge could rule over her body, and direct a woman have her body cut to give birth. It was also won in Dublin, Ireland, the medical persons could not impose genetic testing of PKU on the baby, particular, against the parents right to reject it. If PKU is done, no blood sample need be taken by an insertion of a needle in the child's heel, risking infection. Urine tests can be done at any time, this test is not necessary to be done on the day of birth.

It is hard to prevent a bad birth experiences. Most women on the internet, have had one bad active management where they had no control...wiser, they birth in their own homes, where they are in control. They birth with those they have confidence, either a professional or another birth-experienced mother.

The medical persons and the hospitals all do billings, some regular and some extra billings. They make their money on extra money for extra interventions. It is like going into a store, they always try to sell you more. Same with active management. They sell you on this drug and that, that in 26 percent of the time, is leading to a c-section. The cost of birthing in the USA is now reaching a business intake of $20 billion dollars. If women said no to institutional births, they would only make 3 to 5 percent of that budget. Think about it...you are big business to them, and the business is better spent on your baby, in education, the arts. The baby then might be a genius, if you keep the child out of the grips of active management, the policies of the hospital and the medical persons.

Motive. Think about it: Why would they want to take extra care, patience, for a hand's off birth, if there is no pay off for extra time for what insurance pays for a flat fee for service. They also pay extra for collection of organs and packaging them, so if clamping the cord is without fee, and the collection of the organ, as a waste product now sent to others, sold, the taking of the placenta and the baby's blood trapped in it, has extra billing potential. In doing this, early clamping gives the most trapped blood for selling. The doctor, too, will want to be in and out of the delivery room. To do that, they use drugs, oxytocin. They are making more money and in the next ten minutes, you are finished business. You will have experienced the rip-off, morphine-oxytocin active management program, designed by those who do not communicate with those they serve, the child[bearing women. You will be the sicker for agreeing to be managed, you will nurture an internally injured baby the rest of your life.

You can count on intervention with active management. This is more so, if there is announcement of organs of a special type of blood announcement. If your baby is unlucky to have that type of blood, any arrangement to cause the baby to be the next victim, is easily arranged by Active Management, even the death of the child. Then the whole of the organs are taken, not just the blood. That seemed to be the fate of the Yurko Project. Impaired premature birth, was dead within 2 1/2 months later, the whole of the baby taken at that time, but first immediately cord clamped, after oxytocin induced birth, 5-weeks premature.

There will be no safety net without a signed birth contract that the medical person(s) cannot clamp the cord for any reason, other then the cord tore. And a cord tearing is likely medical negligence, like they dropped the baby. If they bulk at the "pioneer" Lotus birth, or raise an eye to the request...that is not a safe hospital,, to birth your baby. They are judging your right to that request. They are likely, if you check their coolers, harvesting the placentas. They are likely first drained by their labs. If they do consent, to lotus birth, they will likely attempt to immediately remove the baby from your sight, on the pretense to do a test. You do not have to agree to tests on your baby, they have no right to impose a test. They will syringe out the placenta blood...and let you think you took home a baby, that received all of its own blood -- but the lab got the blood...by the syringe-out method.

Even midwives have done that to naive first time birthing mothers, syringed out the placenta's blood through the vein. There was a picture on the internet, when I first began my study. I regret I did not save it to a disk. The new mother, trying the Lotus Birth did not know about leaving the baby in a warm towel, and the placenta too, and to not take the blood out...as the placenta "will" pulsate for up to 20 minutes, in some instances. Compressed cord is one reason, the baby is making up deprived blood. A drugged baby is another reason, slow beating heart.

The baby is taking its time in transfusing blood. Leave nature alone. No harm of the baby deciding for herself / himself on how much blood they will receive and need. All babies different, that we cannot perceive their needs. The baby will decide, that is their right. And, not another's guess.

If after the baby has received all his her own quota of blood, and the baby has trouble...in a few days, then blood-letting can be done. In just the same way, anemic babies received a top up. It works in reverse, but taking out blood from a baby, is safer then adding another's blood to your baby blood stream. Or ringer's lactate to keep the vessels from collapsing, for low blood volume and pressure.

Very few babies have to have blood letting after birth. Generally, they are anemic after hasty cord clamping. Anemia is the reason our babies are so sickly, this can last until they are school age, which can result in mental retardation. Other disorders associated with low blood volume are autism, cancers, brain tumors, leukemias, liver, kidney, holes in the heart, hormone deficiencies, imbalance of enzymes...all are associated with blood deprivation at the child's birth. The baby's system was put into distress to survive.

Check the sick babies by the parents organization bringing the facts out before the public, and not so the government and its secrecy at their hospitals, keeping such matters closed away from the scrutiny of the public.

FALSE REASONS THAT HAVE BEEN USED TO CLAMP A BABY'S LIFELINE, WHILE IT IS STILL PULSATING:

Medical persons are determined persons. If they want your baby's blood, or the twin's, they will clamp the cord for any reason, they can think of: Short cord, fear of bleeding, fear of thick blood, fear of fast flowing blood, and some of these may be caused by IV's of Oxytocin, changing the pH of your baby. It can be dealt with after the baby receives all the blood inside their body. If the drugs are toxic, the baby's body is already exposed the toxins in the drugs permeating all cells and brain and nervous cells too.

The excuses, really, are endless, and novel, just made up. They most always are given in a panic statement. Always the manipulation of a panic, they must act quickly. Most births in institutions have a circus of panic, and a well practiced fire-drill, that they repeat, over and over again, for almost all births. An example of fire drill of nurses walking the fast pace carrying a baby cut form his lifeline, and taking down to the equipment in the ICU, is in the book, A Child is Born, issue 1993.

So if all efforts to protect your baby fails, and the cord is clamped against your will, it is assault, battery and attempted murder, not approved or done with informed consent. So if the cord is clamped outside of the cord tore or for placenta previa, have the medical persons explain it in detail before a Judge.

File a Writ in the child's name for assault, battery, attempted murder, in civil application, for compensation. If the child died of shock of complications, investigate Laying of Information to have the matter set for trial for criminal prosecution.

If the child lives, as was the Ing and Chow boys case, then the Judge, after hearing the case, if criminal negligence, after compensation of civil compensation to the child, for endangering, can turn it over to criminal prosecution, too, for disciplining of the doctor, with a jail sentence.

Again, read the Michael Chow story, written up as a Reason for Judgement. The summary of the Chow-case-law was failure to provide and perceive the child was anemic requiring immediate returning of the blood deprived by immediate cord clamping. The reason given was for a cord around the neck. However, there are options to following directions to clamp and cut a cord around the neck. Common sense. A prudent doctor would have put a finger between the cord and the neck, and allowed the baby to be held, until the rest of the birth was completed, the baby wrapped in a warm towel. Patience is then what is required, not speed. When the placenta was born, empty of blood, because the blood would have transfused, by the child's steady heart beat, into the baby's body, then, the cord could have been safely unwound, and not clamped and cut. All babies, including c-section babies can have no clamping of the cord, the Lotus Birth. All babies means premature babies too.

If you are reading this as a parent, already having had your baby violated, if they are under two or six years after becoming an adult in our area, you can file for a Civil Writ in our child's name. You may go for a Class action if two or more of you have the same complaint, against the same medical person(s) or Hospital that violated their duty of best practice possible least risk of harm was not upheld on this issue.

If you are a victim over the legal age, and you find out from a reliable source, your mother or birth witness, you were a immediate clamped baby and experienced any kind of internal problems, not proven by fact it is a genetic disorder, you can file Criminal Charges, for discipline of violation to your person. Criminal assault to victims may have compensation, if time limits have expired, or by new information released on this issue, now on the Internet, the Judge may feel, in the sake of no injustices going unopposed, the Court will allow a trial, for compensation, in the Civil. All applications to the Court for a reasoned decision, and a trial, or settlement, are protected by the filing of the Writ. It is a simple statement, you as the plaintiff, and you identify the defendant, and simply state the problem. You give no evidence in the Writ, for the evidence is what is presented at the Trial. Sometimes there is a mini-trial, a Discovery. Many times the Discovery results in a out-of-court settlement.

Had the Chow and Ing-case-laws been settled out of court, rather than a trial, the information would not be available for public review and information. The settlements are generally, a no fault, keep silent agreement. No changes of policies result or protection to the public at large, result in most out-of-court settlements. The John Moore Case-law, first denied him compensation for a breach of trust, on appeal was going back to the court of origin. The issue was taking John Moore's spleen and blood tissues, and used in a development of tissues cells, called the MorLine. He found out the tissues were not burned, but used without his consent. The doctor and the lab shared $3 Billion dollars within three months of exploiting him to use a special clinic for tests. It was rumored, likely by a bank deposit, he settled out of court for one-half million dollars, a far cry from $3 billion...but when you are sick, as John Moore was, you settle, after 6 years of the court's system.

HOSPITAL ADMINISTRATION AND ETHICS BOARDS SOUGHT PLACENTAS AND PLACENTA BLOOD WITHOUT INFORMED CONSENT:

At present time, the medical persons seemed pressured. Perhaps, it is the policies and threat of their jobs by the hospitals they work in or the birth centers. Whatever the reasons, the medical persons, and this is around the world, are being solicited to seek the collection of placenta blood, and even the placenta itself.

The Administration Board of each Hospital, by their ethics committee, many having legal advisers on the board, approved that once the organ was detached from the owner/infant, they were free to do as they willed with it, and without parental consent.

The hospital, the doctor or the lab, sold the placentas and the placenta blood. This is confirmed in the latest edition of Principles of Anatomy and Physiology, 10th Edition 2003, page 1076. It was also confirmed in Edmonton, Alberta, the Royal Alexander Hospital, and not denied by the College of Physicians and Surgeons and the Minister of Health, Gary Mar.

In order for the medical societies to harvest the babies, they need the continued ignorance of the general public on this issue. Or, the fear of society not to challenge the medical persons in a court of law. Should the good the medical persons do in society, outside of this issue, allow them to escape Rule of Law? I do not think so. This is if our Charter and Rights and Freedoms and Divine Rule of God , or man's Rule of Law, means anything, at all.

MOTIVES FOR IMMEDIATE UMBILICAL CORD CLAMPING -- VALUE OF ONE UNIT OF STEM CELL PLACENTA BLOOD CAN BE AS HIGH AS $30,000

There is a jackpot to be had by the collection of some types of human blood sought for transplants. This is the search for particular ethnic mix background. The postings of blood matches desired are available to all medical persons and their institutions and labs. This knowledge, known by the medical persons, but not known to the expecting mother, can make her baby most vulnerable, from the time she is known to be pregnant. Multiple birth babies are most at risk of harvesting.

Early clamped infants will be made weaker, some mothers have two babies compromised, both victims of drugs and immediate cord clamping, and early vaccination. Ethnic blood sought, for example, may be a mix marriage of Russian and Italian couple. Or, even Oriental blood can be in demand. Or, a mix of the colored races with others and with white blood. When medical societies post blood for matches in stem cells, like they did for bone marrow transplants, they want to be as close to the person's heritage, for the best possible transplant, for stem cell experimentation.

The experimental work is expensive, costing about $130,000, the $30,000 for the payment of the finder of the specific blood match, found. That is the payoff and we, the public, can be exploited, if we do not know the facts of what is going on; or protected, by ethical practices required and the highest standards in all hospitals and by all doctors. None escaping investigation, as is needed, to keep our standard and trust in the medical services, for consumer protection.

There has been paid $30,000 for one single unit of cord blood. This was oversea's blood paid for by Australia . I have that story on this web site. This was paid before Australia began harvesting their "own" babies. So there is implied motives for the changes of training and the ethics of our trusted medical persons, that the confidence of trust is zero. (See Contents, Australia, pays $30,000).

There is implied motives to the trends of teaching all medical persons to clamping a functioning and pulsating organ, even to cause added distress in the infant's delivery, by the use of drugs. All this causes the child to release hormones into the blood, and the mother, and this is captured by early clamping of the umbilical cord. The trapped blood is then, in most instances, secretly drained by the doctor, or nurse or the lab technicians. Not a word of the volume of blood taken and, in most instances, without informed consent.

It is an assured bet your baby will be left a living child, by early clamping. This is because of the skills and the state of the art of infant revival. Even premature babies can be kept alive for a week, as they are blood-let for samples of newly created stem cells, from 10 to 15 percent total blood volume, done every 2nd and 3rd day. If they die, there is no investigation, at all, as long as this procedure was done by a licensed person and in an approved institution that practices this harvesting of human babies.

The question is to the parents , is do you want a compromised revived baby, that has done its imposed duty to give blood to the State? Or, do you wish to protect your baby that the baby, by God's Design is that blue ribbon baby that you planned from the start?

ODE TO MY PLACENTA

ODE TO MY PLACENTA, is a poem that says it best. This poem is appropriate to be shared as an educational learning for children who can then learn birth from their mother's lap respect for all creatures. They will learn to respect both human and animals lifeline. These children then will be ethical future medical persons, who will do no harm. All creatures have a right to be born equal to be the strongest and healthiest babies -- this is God Ordained. All natural birth provides for this care and duty.

The poem, "Ode to My Placenta" was written by Dr. Sarah Buckley, Link, please go to: www.lotusbirth.com/doc/FEB2003Lotusbirth-524.htm Dr. Buckley's own last three children had the Lotus Birth. Dr. Buckley learned the art of natural birth education, during her second pregnancy. Like most of us, she did not know about the pioneer's method of child birth, for her first baby, regrettably. Most of us living today, have been harvested survival babies.

I ask: What might have we done or accomplished had we not be compromised, at, birth? Or, how much more the ease to learn or to be doing whatever it is we are doing today, with a whole lot less stress. How many of those who have drug addictions were the babies heavily drugged during birth?

Accomplishments are to the "will of the individual." Whatever our condition, even after being victimized by the clamp, let us always remember we are 100 percent human beings. Some of us may be less than whole by accident or by birth interventions of drugs. But, we remain, 100 percent human. Therefore, each and everyone of us, must be respected and our duty is to respect others. This is so all humans are born equal, in the future - Do no harm.

This is accomplished by our knowledge of natural birth education and practice. To know this is to know that to be the best that we possible could be, by the Design of Nature...we leave the natural alone . . . leave the pulsating umbilical cord, untouched. Unless, of course, the cord tore or for placenta previa, which occur, rarely. Leaving well enough alone provides for all creatures to be blue ribbon babies, regardless, if we are human babies or animal. Our moral duty is to protect them all -- all who cannot protect themselves, being so little. The strong do not pick on the weak.

Please sign the Petition Against Active Management and Harvesting of Babies.

www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/102580814

(References used in research of some four years: www.lotusbirth.com/doc/FEB2003Lotusbirth-110.htm

Search Lotusbirth (Just add the word or phrase to search this web site, such as: Ethnic groups blood most desired ; Canadian Criminal Code when a baby is a human being, AAP Policy, SOGC Policy, AGOG Policy, No Policy, Midwives collect blood, Codes for collection of blood; Tri Council Policies, to name a few).

OTHER INFORMATION:

IMMEDIATE AND EARLY UMBILICAL CORD CLAMPING:

The ICC and ECC method are a false but a common trend taught most medical persons, today. Motives must be sought. Blood deprivation is causing oxygen debts to key internal organs (brain, heart, lungs) and even the muscles of the child -- ICC and ECC logically weakens the child and the damages are like a roll of the dice. No one can guess where the problems will show up, many health and behavior problems are latent in discovery.

Diagnosis may take up until the child is 7 and 9 years of age and the care and treatment of the child, during labor and following birth long forgotten. Universally, the medical persons do not respect the neonate and record the condition of the umbilical cord when clamped, or the position of the child's body when clamped.

That is not by accident. The medical persons do not want to leave an account for review or comparison of why the delayed clamped child progresses well and the other ICC and ECC cannot tie his/her shoe laces until age 10, if then. The metabolic disorders are tried to be excused as genetic. This stops all investigation and review of bad medical science and practice at birth. There is no investigation on "active management" and why not "natural birth education and practice" instead.

The hidden motives for ICC and ECC were concealing the hospitals and the medical lab involved in selling the placenta and the placenta blood. Allowance of the practice have been done by the smooth talking medical persons convincing the mothers that what they did or intend to do, was a benefit for them or the child. Not so, and if so, prove it in a court of law.

There is no need to clamp a red, firm and pulsating functioning organ, unless, for some needed to be investigated reason, the cord tore or for placenta previa. Otherwise, the medical persons are using policies, clinical studies to escape liability of criminal assault, battery, and attempted murder. That they revive one in sixteen babies, seldom a baby dying is no good excuse for endangering in the first place. Nor, should it go without a criminal investigation, and certainly compensated in civil court to the child's trust fund.

HARVESTING FOR FEES FOR SERVICES AND PROFITS:

The medical persons are likely harvesting components of the placenta's whole blood and taking the baby's blood without informed consent, for personal profit. This is shocking! All medical persons have access to posted and wanted types of blood wanted and tissues. A requested match may well have a child target at the hospital, waiting for the child's birth to take place there. There will be a reason given the parents why the child just had to have early clamping, the most recent one used by the registered-nurse-midwives and the doctors is the fear of the mother bleeding. See Compensation Codes for Collection of Blood, organs.

There is a natural buffer of increased blood to the mother that starts three months before the baby is born. It is natural for all mammals to bleed at birth, and for the human mother, four cups are considered normal in blood loss. A full placenta in her womb is at risk of leakage, causing her distress of two types of blood mixing. This creates problems to the next babies she may have. The threat to the baby is obvious to any cell endangered of dehydration of deprived oxygenated blood to it, for any moment of time.

DO MEDICAL PERSONS KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING, OR THE INTERNAL HARM OF RISK TO ANY CHILD EARLY CORD CLAMPED?

I wonder if doctors, midwives, and doulas, ambulance medics really realize what is really going on? Have they thought this out? And, what of the deceit and deception to the members of the public, and the police, and the law courts? How is the public's interest best served when we have class actions of $500 Million sought in Ontario, alone for autistic children; over 200,000 Canadian children are taking Ritalin , and over 155,000 children seeking medical care and treatment in the Vancouver Children's Hospital, and over 300,000 in Alberta; and likely so, at all major cities of Canada. We should be alarmed seeking an Official Inquiry on Maternity Matters and the care of the neonate, why this is so.

If you are concerned, or do you have a mysteriously caused learning or behavior problematic child, and early clamping was likely involved, plus drugs, a false and harmful birth position, supine; and vaccinations while the child was yet anemic, at two months of age, then, please sign our Petition against unnecessary medical Intervention that are organized harmful birth care and treatment, called "Active Management"

The Active Management training benefits busy schedules of most hospitals and their drugs manipulate the baby's birth. Drugs cause distress. Distress causes more stem cell to be released. So is there motive to distressing the fetus? The early clamping takes the trapped blood in the placenta, of the released stem cells. The babies, live, yes, but are compromised, and this is assault and battery.

This concern had been sent to the former Hon. Prime Minister of Canada, Jean Chretien, who alleged, in Canada, the Federal Ministry of Health and Health Canada or the Justice System have no duties of what the Provinces or Two Territories are doing to others, nor of the medical training and practice, across Canada. The present Hon Paul Martin, sworn in as Prime Minister, December 12, 3003, has been advised of this issue.

The Federal Government, is directly or indirectly involved in the health care of the Nation. They have set up grants by the Policies of the Tri-Council, who did not protect the newborn citizen from harvesting of its stem cells.

All levels of governments are involved in this research and participation of it, knowing they have been harvesting babies, the newborn citizen, who must have equal security of person. Yet, this issue is not yet before the courts. Why not? Or, an investigation of the training of most medical persons involved in early clamping of the child's lifeline, and quality of life hopes.

If you disagree, with our Prime Minister of Canada, and the Senators, and those of special health committees, please send a personal letter to the Prime Minister.

Please Email to the Office of the Prime Minister of Canada: pm@pm.gc.ca

The current Prime Minister of Canada now is, The Hon. Paul Martin , as of December 12, 2003.

Please share with others, too, all past mothers, and those to be yet the mothers of the future. Let this be the last generation of harvested babies, as the last three and four generations of Western Societies women have been deceived. There is no good excuse for continued early clamping of a pulsating cord because the evidence is in the placenta, that is drained secretly away from the natural parent's awareness. That has been what I call a conspiracy of secrecy organized by those who had a duty of trust to do no harm.

Let your Religious Organization know, so they can create their own petition against false training and practice now in our medical care services, and in each community, at every hospital.

You may also want to check out euthanasia going on in your small rural hospitals. Increased dosages of medicine are putting persons down, against their will. Those picked on are the smaller then 5-pound babies, those on disabilities, and the aged. We seem to have a blend of the philosophies, including survival of the fittest that does not tolerate the weak.

There is evidence of the medical decisions that if they have determined someone to have a fatal disease, whether true or not, that person is going to likely die within three weeks of diagnoses, if treating them is in a hospital.

The changes for euthanasia has come through the changes of the Provincial and Territorial Health Care Agreements. Euthanasia was turned down at the Federal Level, and of particular interest was the Tracy Latimer Trial, whose father put her down, when she was entering womanhood, at the age of 12. The means to protect a person intended to be put down, by family and the doctors working as a team, have through the provinces stopped third party or Next Friend's appeal to court, in an expedient time to prevent death by over-dosages of drugs, to the alleged sick.

We need support, Internationally, to help Canada correct or investigate present training of all medical persons who will or intend to be at a mother's birth.

We need support for informed choices, of both parents, that our babies are not being harvested by methods of Active Management.

The only way to stop that is to return to natural birth education and practice. This allows the woman to have control over the position of her

body, during birth, no drugs, and no tying off the infant's circulation system. This allows for stronger babies, no risk of invasion of viruses by

injections, and by the babies not having early clamping, they are getting full immunities by full blood transfusion from the placenta into the

expanding lungs. Lungs take a considerable amount of blood. Very little blood is left in the placenta by allowing God's Design to be completed, naturally.

We must ask why the medical persons concerned about these issues have not discussed this issue with the politicians and protected our youth, or dealt appropriately with the false education now evident in Biology textbooks, K-12, and in Secondary Education. One current textbook, 2003, " Principles of Anatomy and Physiology , 10th Edition, by Gerard J. Tortora and Sandra Reynolds Grabowski, published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., reveals the placenta harvested for the selling to pharmaceutical companies, page 1076. Pharmaceutical companies also have a conflict of interest in the educating of our medical persons. See the Merck Manual on the Internet.

I have attempted to reach all levels of government but they would not deal with the medical professionals involved. Why would a billion dollar business be challenged of its ethics, when the government gets it cut? How many of our politicians have shares in these pharmaceutical companies who are doing the training with harmful birth positions, harmful drugs, cutting of the woman's body are all directed by pretense it is in the woman's or child's best interest. Now, they allow for the living baby, but they have been harvested of essential nutrition at birth. The woman and child are just to be grateful for life.

Most hospitals can revive a baby they caused to be compromised in the first place, and the woman harmed by practices of "active management" when natural birth education and practice is not being supported, at all. Please do what you can to investigate the false information in all biology textbooks, K-12 and in Secondary Education in your schools. The index is the place to look for umbilical cord, and fetal to neonate circulations system. If you must use the courts for an Injunction the false pages are stricken through as harmfully false, please do that.

It has been known by common sense not to interrupt the infant's circulation system, for any newborn, human or animal. Research dates before 1801. We have no good excuse for the deception going on within the medical professional groups and that the public was not informed how to protect their babies, our future, our youth.

The side effect, by early umbilical cord clamping, if the baby lives, not dying of shock, is that the baby is anemic from anywhere from 6 weeks to 6 months*. The babies are often not checked for this anemic condition, and thus vaccinated in this weakened condition at birth. The baby takes this long*, if not longer to replace the red blood cells deprived him/her at birth. (* Reference as to interpretation to Policy #71, December 1998, of The Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada (SOGC)

The baby cannot be known to be in good health, when the firm, red pulsating cord is being clamped, sometimes instantly at birth or during birth. The baby is not age 17, cannot give informed consent, is not 110 pounds, and has not finished growing. Babies, by law, must be equally protected.

The baby needs the hormones and enzymes for proper growth and development. But the baby is deprived these essential nutrients and components of blood by needless hasty clamping. The medical person made this decision without permission or consent, in most instances, or evidence of need this was a benefit to the baby/owner of the placenta blood, deprived, the infant/neonate, with full protection, deemed in law for security of person.

It is most unfair and unusual punishment, even if the child lives. But because the baby sleeps 22 of 24 hours, the parents are not aware of the child's predicament of being weakened, in most instances. Any internal damages (many latent) to the child are most often passed off as inherited bad genes.

The trend towards the State of the Art practices of today are seldom investigated for the one in sixteen babies with internal defects. Some of these internal defects, holes in the heart, brains lesions, may be the result of scanning, needlessly.

SCANS ARE THEY RESPONSIBLE FOR ONE IN SIXTEEN BABIES HAVING DEFECTS?

What do scans offer, in most instances, but likely fearful parents who may not have a perfect child, or the fear of it, an abortion, and thus the fetus is taken for research, as well. The blood used in research that is trapped in the placenta, the organs used as well. If the baby is allowed to continue his/her development, unknown internal damages may lurk from the scan, and how many and the strength of the scanning machine, and the skill used. We have mysterious sick children, world wide.

Or, to the internal damages, it is logical that the infant's cells were damaged by the insufficient oxygenated blood volume and pressure by the unhealthy practices of most medical persons who are involved in the training and actually participation of early clamping the infant's functioning and pulsating umbilical cord.

EMERGENCY MANUALS WERE DIRECTING EARLY UMBILICAL CORD CLAMPING:

Those being falsely trained, and research indicates these associations, knowingly or not, the Workman's Compensation and the Canadian Red Cross have provided false information in emergency manuals, biology and reproduction textbooks. Those using this information are then being trained through their Emergency Manuals and textbooks, including the 9-1-1 medics and emergency aids. Sadly, they are being trained in this risk taking practice for clamping a pulsating cord.

The emergency medics are the least able, as in homebirths, to do vein to vein transfusion, if the baby goes limp for the shock or insufficient blood volume, after hasty cord clamping. In a hospital, if it becomes obvious the baby is struggling to survive, oxygen and blood expanders can be given. But any revived baby is going to be compromised, internally, somewhat.

The degree of internal injury may be subtle to serious. The deprived placenta blood is, in any case, sent to research. The family none-the-wiser of how much blood "their" baby was deprived by the medical person(s) involved in hasty clamping. The baby, in most cases, was not transfused with his/her own placenta blood, if more blood was needed to stabilize the child so he/she could live. (See the Chow-case-law, Ontario, Canada).

THOSE LACKING HORMONES OR ENZYMES, WAS THE PROBLEM GENETIC OR THE VOLUME OF BLOOD DEPRIVED THE CHILD WITH THOSE IN THE BLOOD AND NOT TO BE DENIED THE OWNER/INFANT?

The internal deprivation of hormones, enzymes, vitamins, and minerals and other components of blood of white cells, mature blood cells, stem cells, platelets, plasma is never sought out and investigated by proper authorities. Nor, by Coroners, in most instances, if the baby dies, after care and treatment by a medical person.

No investigation for checking out for medical malpractice, even if there is a policy directing it, are done, in most deaths of babies. The false policies needing correction and addressing in a Court room setting. The amount of the blood drained from the placenta, are the available facts, or ought to be, and should be on the baby's medical charts.This then would be for review for when the baby is frequently sick and fails to progress as those babies who were not drugged or early cord clamped, at birth.

CLAMPING AND CUTTING OF THE CORD IS 'NOT' A MEDICAL NEED:

Unless the cord tore or for placenta previa, the umbilical cord need not have been clamped or removed. All reasons the medical person gave must be investigated before a proper procedure. This can be the option of the legal guardians or Next Friend of the child, to be fact finders of the care and treatment given a vulnerable and helpless child. All children require proper investigation if they are suspected of not having their legal constitutional rights of security of person or equal protection given them, during and after birth.

The early removal of the umbilical cord was not routinely done by the pioneers prior to 1923 in Canada or the United States. That is the secret of longevity of many of the persons, living today, born prior to 1923. Today, we are seeing a medical bias controlled and evident on the movies of a Hollywood version of a custom of cutting off the pulsating cord from the placenta, yet in the womb, and when the baby is not breathing.

The pioneers, by common sense, did no invasive handling of the umbilical cord or the placenta. The placenta was put, equally, in a warm towel and kept close to the baby. A warm placenta allows the continuation of the blood flow into the baby. The internal vessels of the baby's own system shuts down when their needs are fulfilled.Other placenta birthing creatures, leave their offspring placenta and cord alone, until all pulsation ceases, or the placenta pulls off naturally.

Dogs eat the placenta only after the pulsation has ceased to pulsate. That has been observed, and cats do the same. That is natural instinct, and the mother of the human child would do that, too, if she, too, birthed unassisted and protected her baby, until the placenta was naturally out from her own body. But the doctors are taking over the control and doing that hasty clamping, before the completion of the birth, to another's baby, and without informed consent.

These medical persons, women and men, are pretending early clamping as a medical need, and that is a lie. The biology textbooks are directing a medical need for hasty clamping and that is a lie, telling "human babies" have to have their umbilical cord immediately cord clamped. That is common nuisance in directing a harmful practice and deceiving the public, at large, even if only one baby was violated. But the case is millions of babies are being exploited, and the reason, logically, the medical professionals are selling the placenta blood and the placenta, to research companies, cosmetic companies, and drug companies.

Almost every medical professional would enjoy a spin off by the causing of internal damages, that most lawyers would fear to bring to a court, to say, an unncessary procedure caused the hole in the heart, lung problems, brain lesions, but that is evident on animals so treated, with such unnecessary treatment.

Other creatures, what do they do?: Monkeys leave the placenta alone and it falls off naturally. Colts stand up, and stretch and break off the placenta. In all cases of unassisted births of all other mammals, there is no rush to do immediate detaching of the cord. The blood in the placenta was made for the baby's needs, not another's.The truth about the birth in the pioneer's home birth was simple.They birthed in the warmest and cleanest room in the house. Most family members were present or available. They didn't do unnecessary fire drills of weighing the baby, measuring as though it was medical need. They left the cord alone, until the placenta was detached, and not all pioneers cut off the cord.

When the placenta was expelled, many of the pioneers simply put it in a diaper, and it and the cord fell off in a day or two's time, for a perfect and non-infected navel. Today, the pioneer method has been called the Lotus Birth, named after person who revived this healthy and natural state of care of the newborn child. This person, Claire Lotus Day, questioned hasty umbilical cord clamping. She revived this no clamping in a hospital, for her own child. She did so without the apparent knowledge it was a custom practiced by pioneers, and never abandoned in small villages of Third World Countries, where no Western trends taught them to remove the cord.

The World Health Organization knows of and states, no harm done to leave the placenta and cord alone, no clamping or cutting need be done, not even for cosmetic reasons. They did warn about the use of the common drug, Oyxtocin, stating this drug must be followed with early cord clamping, to prevent "brain" injury to the child. So are the mother's given the medical research of this fact? No.

Western societies are the ones most at risk of dangerous medical malpractices. Why? The motive has got to be our use of blood components, and organ transplants, and the babies are fair game, apparently, and endangered, in most instances, without informed choice or protection by their real legal guardian(s) the mother and the father of the child, if known.

MEDICAL EXPERTS WHO SAY "DON'T CLAMP THE CORD.

See what the medical experts (links below) have to say. EXPERT TESTIMONY:

Many medical professionals are trying to reach the mother-to-be for safer birth experiences, to both the mother and the child. I recommend they read Dr. Sarah Buckley's Sworn Declaration , please see the List of Contents, this website.

A retired obstetrician, Dr. George M. Morley, who had delivered some 10,000 babies, states there are only two reasons to justify early cord clamping, (1) cord tore and (2) placenta previa. The other alleged reasons are not good excuses to endanger the child and have the child nutrient deficient, dehydrated, and injuries resulting internally, like holes in the heart. www.cordclamping.com

The two visual reasons for early cord clamping would require the means for correction to the child, if serious injury is to be avoided. At present, studies reveal one in sixteen children are having to be revived at birth. That is unnatural. (See, in the list of contents, the cost to raise an Autistic Child, British Columbia, paying $60,000, annually, per child. Dr. Morley associates autism and attention deficit disorders, and many internal problems, with early cord clamping, too).

One in four persons, today, are having heart problems*. That is unnatural. Most common heart problems in children are the holes in the heart. That is caused, after birth, by lack of proper blood volume and pressure for the foreman ovale to close and the ductus arteriosus to seal. (See the hole in heart babies that died, most of them needlessly, in Winnipeg, Man, list of contents) (*See also list of references and resources in the list of contents).

Some holes in the heart are not detected or reported for a long time. Adults in their thirties are discovering they have a hole in the heart, the doctor alleging it was there since birth.

The dangers of early cord clamping has been known but concealed within the medical community for a long time, in fact since 1801. One of the best research and reports is available through the Lancet. It is dated 1957 and was done in London, Uk, by Dr. Mavis Gunther. Dr. Gunther proved how long a cord would pulsate if left alone, over 14-minutes for drugged babies. She also stated evidence for no clamping the cord is that for unassisted births, the child thrives.

Best educated and most ethical doctors and other medical persons do not clamp a pulsating umbilical cord, except as stated above for the only two visual reasons. Even these exceptions require to be prepared to give the child oxygenated blood as to his her needs if early deprivation weakens the child. Anemia must be checked for routinely.

Serious consequences may happen to a parent, who had no signed birth plan, taking home a sick child after immediate cord clamping and drugging the child by giving the mother drugs during labor, as induction of a premature child.

Is Sick Baby's Blood Used in Research and Transplants?:

If the blood in the placenta is drugged, is it not used? No, it seems drugged blood does not disqualify the neonate's blood from use in research, in fact, the blood drained into the tubes and plastic bags for research are treated with rat poison, known as Heparin , to keep the blood from clotting too quickly. Heparin is used to kill rodents by causing hemorrhages. The same disorder is likely true to any site in the human body. This, logically would be particularly true, also, to a baby already anemic, and since birth.

Even a sick baby's blood is used, and as evident of that fact, check out the Yurko Project. http://www.freeyurko.bizland.com/albayati1.html

This child was very sick, at birth. It is not known if he was given a blood transfusion. It is likely his placenta blood was taken for research. Mr. Alan Yurko, the father of the deceased child, wrote me that his child was early cord clamped. Hasty clamping is alleged needed to be done if Oxytocin was used in the birth, and Pitocin was used to induce labor, 5-weeks prematurely. The reason given was low amniotic fluids. The mother was not apparently informed, sometimes, the amniotic fluid will replenish itself, with care.

Then when the child died two and one half months later, still sick, but then vaccinated, the child's organs were also taken by Translife . This story is how the Florida father, in jail for alleging assault and battery to the child, serving life plus ten years for a Shaken Baby Conviction, is attempting for a new trial. He did not have the information he now has on the birth of his child. Alan Yurko alleges his innocence, that the child died of complications after being injected with six vaccinations. The child was still anemic when injected. The child appeared to be, what I think he had, a diabetic coma and misdiagnosed in the care and treatment when Alan Yurko took his child in when not breathing. It will take several readings of the website, and a further study on the nature of diabetes, and how it can be started by viruses.

REPRODUCTION BOOKS REVEAL SELLING OF THE PLACENTAS THAT WERE DETACHED BY THE MEDICAL PERSON(S) AND WITHOUT INFORMED CONSENT:

The facts of the placenta and its trapped blood properties being in a conflict of interest of doctors and the hospitals they work in, or birth centers, and that of midwives are found in the selling of the placenta for research and to drug companies. This fact was stated back in 1982, in the Reproduction books. The evidence of using the placenta for research and drug companies was found in this Middle School's Library resources:

To quote from Reproduction,The Cycle of Life, p 98:

". . .Once the head and shoulders have emerged the rest of the birth proceeds rapidly. the baby's body is finally free of its nine-month-long home. the pearly blue umbilical cord still links child to womb, sending him blood from the placenta. The doctor will wait until the cord has stopped pulsating before clamping it above the baby's abdomen and severing it."

P 98, "After the placenta is delivered, the doctor will examine it to make sure it is intact. It is then discarded or sold to companies for use in research or beauty products."

Reproduction, The Cycle of Life, by Karen Jensen and the Editors of U.S. News Books, page 98. ISBN 0-89193-606-8, ISBN 0-89193-666-1 (school ed.) The Middle School has used these books since 1983.

WHEN DID I LEARN OF NO CLAMPING OR CUTTING OF THE CORD BY OUR GRANDMOTHER'S GENERATION:

I first learned of no clamping/tying off or cutting off the umbilical cord, when I was age fifteen, in 1957. But like most mothers of today, I was not factually informed of the risk taking of the trends of clamping off a pulsating cord, (disease entering the cut cord), and blood deprivation and nutrients deprived the child and immunities, if the cord was clamped even if the cord was pulsating, just a tad.

I thought it was gross to be leaving the cord and placenta with the child. Not so. Leaving the placenta with the child is most logical, if you take the time to rethink the benefits: no cord infections, no trauma of too soon clamping interrupting the circulation system, the baby gets all the blood in the placenta; the privacy of the families are kept, as the placenta and genetic codes are buried beneath a shrub.

On rethinking the practice, as gross as it may sound, no clamping or cutting the cord is most logical and a benefit to the child. By getting familiar with the logic and health benefit to the child sets aside quickly grossness of leaving the child with the placenta in a diaper or cheese cloth (for airing and faster drying). See Dr. Sarah Buckley's Declaration, the original Declaration is in my files. A video on the Lotus Birth, will be available to view on Canadian video machines, is soon, on its way.

By requesting this no-clamping procedure puts the mother to-be to have the control, as it should be and her being informed and educated on child birth. Ideally, this education takes place before she plans a family. It is the mother's legal right to have a signed birth plan that the doctors, not for any reason, unless the cord tore or for placenta previa, can touch her baby's lifeline/hopeline. Nor drug her, thus her baby. Nor cut her body to birth her baby, thus risk her and her baby to blood toxins.

SIGNED BIRTH CONTRACTS:

The mother's best protection for a natural birth is having a signed birth CONTRACT. It is as simple as that. Are they recommended by experts? Yes, the good in Policy #71, December 1998, does show a "signed" birth plan as the expecting mother's legal right. A birth plan is only wishes, a contract signed is more definite of what the doctor or midwife or nurse or hospital, by their policies, cannot do to the woman's body or her baby's.

Nothing in a medical policy can usurp the rights of the individual to maintain control over their own body, and the parents God given law the parents are the legal guardians over their child, and are to protect their infant over endangering practices as are injections at birth and early umbilical cord clamping before the placenta is expelled, for c-section or vaginal birthed babies.

Please, do risk yourself or your baby by going to any hospital or doctor not willing to sign her care and treatment consented to, birth "contract", or not consented to treatment, as to what is being rejected, if the mother is saying no to any cutting of her body and no to drugs, and no to clamping off her baby's lifeline/hopeline. It is not when the cord is cut that does the damage, remember it is the clamping off the circulation system. Some tools now clamp and cut the cord instantly. They are being used by the ambulance medics.

The legal right of the mother is to inform publicly, the doctor who will not sign a birth plan, and wants dominating control over her body and that of the child's, or the hospital, to allow that care, if their birth premises are to be used. The mother may then feel safer to birth unassisted in her own home, and make do, with the best she can get for an observed witnessed birth, and minimal help, if requested.

DOUBLE STANDARD OF INFORMED MEDICAL CONSENT:

The public must be made aware of the double standard of no informed choice given to the pregnant mother and her right to have least invasive practices and a natural or unassisted birth even in a hospital. Is a mother crazy, if she is pregnant, to loose her right of informed choice? Well, some medical persons treat as though she were, and not of her right mind to make an informed decision. Take the case of a mother imposed on in the United Kingdom, to have an c-section.

On her appeal, it was ruled a doctor was out of place to determine the mother could not make an informed decision to have refused the c-section. The Appeal court ruled this was not a right of the doctor to do an operation without consent of the pregnant mother. (See BMJ for the full story).

Informed choice and rejection of medical services is a right given to all others. This then, if policies are different for a pregnant woman, is a discrimination to a group of persons, and a sex, the pregnant mother and her right as the legal guardian to determine best practice possible least risk of harm to herself and/or her baby.

Natural unassisted birth may be also a factor for women who have little or no medical services. They do not have to agree to cutting of their bodies or drugs used to give birth to a child. Even if the doctor alleges a benefit. All risk factors must be known in an appropriate time for the mother to make an informed decision. Doctors are not doing this during prenatal visits or classes given and controlled by the registered nurses associations, like the Reproduction Care Services.

NATURAL BIRTH MEANS THE FETUS AND MOTHER'S NATURAL HORMONES WORK AS A TEAM, IF NOT INTERFERED WITH BY DRUGS:

Nature has provided for hormones, like ' relaxin" to widen the birth canal, expand the hip joints to allow for the birth of the child in a gravity position, or side-ways birth. So why are doctors doing episiotomies routinely, and again on women who have had an episiotomy?

Hormones work best if not interfered with by drugs, like natural oxytocin , and prolactin, to name a few. What drugs the mothers are given are artificially made and with questionable preservatives in them, like chlorobutanol often in put in synthetic oxytocin. The latter is alleged to cause, eventually, thyroid problems. And what doctor or medical person can guess the allergic reactions to any drug given a pregnant mother and her child? There is a risk that both can react, even die from drugs given to a birthing mother.

NO HARM DONE BY NOT DOING A MEDICAL TREND/PROCEDURE:

Leaving the umbilical cord alone, is not harmful to the child. The right to do that means even if the baby must be operated on, or for a c-section birth, the baby remains with her/his placenta and cord, untouched, not clamped, until it naturally falls off or the mother and father remove the cord, at their own place and convenience.

A home will have less chance of staph infections and viruses then most hospitals, have, naturally in their air and surroundings, today, or the risk of them. The parents do not need to be a surgeon to remove the cord. Boiled scissors or a sharp knife and iodine are the methods some pioneers used to cut the cord, if done at all.

Warnings abound on unnecessary medical operations of a circumcision, too, the right of the mother to know it is not a medical need or a benefit to the child. It endangers the child, may even cause the child his life, or quality of life, as is the same of hasty cord clamping.

Most parents, the legal guardian of the child, have not given informed consent for any medical person to stop the placenta oxygenated blood circulation into the baby.

The placenta blood is designed to go into the baby's expanding lungs. Placenta blood is not excess blood. To leave the cord alone will be to prevent the risk of lung disorders, and holes in the heart, and brain malfunctions and disorders to the nervous system and many other internal organs. The decision of interruption of the circulation system, in most instances, was often a matter of the medical person imposing the clamp without telling the parents no clamping of the cord or detachment need be done at all.

The hospital, or the medical staff or the doctor(s) or surgeon(s) did not tell the parents, beforehand, of their allowance of the doctor's intent, when they knew no clamping or cutting of the cord is legally done by some doctors. Or, failed to inform the birthing mother that the procedure of care on the umbilical cord is merely the whims and decision and the guess of the person taking control of the quality of life that child will have in the future. Or, failed to tell the parent(s) that the hospital had a conflict of interest and intended to use the deprived blood trapped in the placenta for their own experiments of the day. This fact was confirmed in the Canadian Hospital, the Royal Alexander Hospital in Edmonton.

The knowledge of no consent and use of placenta blood was acknowledged by the Alberta College of Physicians and Surgeons and the Health Wellness Minister, Gary Mar. No changes, to date, have been made, knowing violations of parental rights of informed choice and no risk taking of their babies born in the RAH. If this is permitted at the RAH, it is likely true in all hospitals across Canada. If true in Canada, then true world wide. That is to how policies are organized and shared world wide to all medical associations, and apparently to the biology teachers for reprinting in most biology textbooks. See list of references and materials in the contents.

Any child who has even momentarily interruption of the circulation system and/or has to be revived is an impaired and compromised child. The child will look apparently normally, but the latent internal damages will surface at sometime during the child's life, if they live from hasty cord clamping.

What may be factors to a child's early cord clamping: Size of the child. A premature babies have the most stem cells, so they are targeted not to be allowed full transfusion of blood into their lungs. Color, and mixed races blood is most desired and posted for stem cell transplants. Sex, race and even marital status or social status of the mother/family of the child are not ruled out as factors of the decision and power of the person wielding a tool, that is a weapon, not necessary, in most practical care and treatment in a natural child birth.

The child will be weakened by the degree of nutrients and oxygen of blood deprived even one cell (one cell can direct 10,000 other cells, if not impaired) by early clamping on a functioning organ.

TRAINING OF MEDICAL PERSONS, WERE TO BE LICENSED TO BE COMPETENT AND ETHICAL -- DO NO HARM :

The Registered Nurses must be questioned if they were working in maternity wards and not sufficiently or adequately trained on the fetus to neonate circulation system. Or, the fact that all drugs given the mother during labor cross the placenta, and side effects to both mother and child.

They are following hospital and doctors policies but they have no apparent duty to have the mother give informed consent, and they are trusting in the prenatal classes, that are also taught by registered nurses. The registered nurses and their trainers must be part of the investigation of care and treatment to the mother and child. A Commission Inquiry on the training and services to maternity matters and care of the child is long over due.

My research revealed that most RNs have only been trained on the adult circulation system and do not fulfill their Standard of Care of best practice possible, and filling out what they witnessed or participated in the timing and condition of the cord, when clamped, then cut. The information by implied duty, including the duty of the doctor, even for a hospital birth, was to report all care and treatment and condition and reasons of treatment.

This medical recording is not being done when clamping a pulsating umbilical cord. Why not? This is true of both the doctor and the nurse. Why is that? And this apparently is world wide. It prejudices the right of the child for legal compensation for wrongful and/or needless interference of his/her lifeline, the pulsating umbilical cord.

A revived child is best revived while yet sill attached to the cord and the placenta, that yet maybe inside the mother birth canal, the blood in it yet warm, and able to be transfused into the revived child. Least harm of endangering is to revive the child, where is, how is. That is logical, and removing the child to take the child to another area and then give the child artificial means of blood and oxygen, does not make much sense. Moments allowing for impairments to the child's abilities were risked, and not so, or limited risks, if revived, where is, how is.

If the nurses are not being properly trained, then are the doctors or the medics? Are the criminal codes and ethics being taught them, regarding informed choice, and unnecessary medical practices that endanger being done in many hospitals today? And those being trained in revival of a neonate, why are they taking the baby off the placenta's cord, instead of revival where is how is?

They are saying they are doing that for the benefit of the mother, did she ask the baby be revived by taking it off its own means of oxygenated blood and volume of blood, of his/her own kind, from his/her own organ, the placenta? If not, why did they assume they could do that for their own convenience of a more pleasant spot to revive the child. All births are not without blood and a mess. That is why they have warm towels, and means to place the child still close to the mother, but not off the pulsating cord, or will be pulsating again, with some aid.

If the nurses, today, are not as adequately trained as to some evidence of logic, many years ago, why are they not now properly trained? If they failed to make out a separate care and treatment report on the child's on medical chart as to care and treatment, why? Why are there no reports on the clamping and the cutting of the cord, and the condition of the cord when clamped, and to the birth of the child, or part of the body born, when the cord was tied off, hand-squeezed off, or clamped? Where is the evidence of the drug being in the baby's blood system or placenta?

Why is there no medical lab report of the amount of blood drained from the placenta, and used in lab research or in testing of the child made known to the legal guardian(s) of the child? That is, the parents legal right to know, if breach of trust, is not involved. Informed consent, means that the parents were told no clamping of the cord need be done, at all. They could elect that care, could they not? But, if done, they had a legal right to know the hospital drained the blood, trapped in the placenta. And they had a legal right to know how much blood was drained from the placenta, early clamped and "where" it went? Who had possession of the genetic information in organ tissue and blood?

Why was not the facts of where or how the placenta and the blood were discarded done with informed consent, if sent to research and for stem cell transplants and done with informed consent, making the liability and the accountability of that care to the duty of the child, when he or she is able to check out the facts of care, until they are of at least 27 years of age.

Age 27, for a civil action, is generally the legal time a child is considered an adult, plus seven years to make a civil claim of bodily harm done without just cause and outside of natural child birth or proven fact of need the procedure was a benefit to the child, if the mother was not in any danger of life and death situation, that the child was sacrificed in care and treatment, rendering the child impaired or compromised, to live that life with less quality normally that would be there, if born outside of medical care services, in most instances of a natural birth.

DUTY TO THE CHILD:

What parent would knowingly deprive her baby from 20 to 50 percent total blood volume, ( 4 to 6 ounces of blood out of a possible 10 ounces of blood for a 9-pound baby), that would make the difference of her baby being a blue-ribbon-baby and just a "living baby?"

The facts of doctors clamping the cord before all pulsation had ceased, if done at all, is the evidence in the placenta, yet trapped in the mother's womb. This fact of evidence is seldom investigated at the time of the child's birth, the parents distracted now to the care and attention to the newborn child.

Most hospitals count on the child being a distraction as they promptly remove the placenta, placed in an environmental bag, that is taken in most cases to their own labs or sent out to larger labs, the environmental bags, containing organs and the blood, picked up by contracted services, unknown to the public, where the human organs go or how they are discarded, burning or used in research, and/or sold to cosmetic and various drug companies. And who drained the blood from the placenta. (See picture of a full placenta at this web site).

This information of the unnecessary trend in hasty clamping is widely concealed from the general public's information, at all hospitals. Check out your local hospital's policy and see the cold shoulder you get as to your inquiries, where does the blood and the placenta go, and are the providers and collectors of placenta blood being compensated by medical insurance plans by a special code of blood samples taken?

Some will say they grind up the placenta and other organs and flush them down the toilet. Is that meeting environmental laws, if you believe that story? What is likely happening the placenta, after being drained of placenta blood, are then ground up for further centrifugal extraction of hormones, enzymes, and so forth. That is the same process we separate the cream from the milk.

Cord Stem Cell Blood:

This trapped blood, trapped in the placenta, is what is called cord stem cell blood, because it is drained out from the cord. Most governments of the day, their Ministries of Health, Provincial and Federal are involved and in the government grants being used in the taking of the infant's blood and used in research. While they have informed consent of most medical procedures, they have not included equal protection and security of person to the newborn child. In Canada, policies, on the use of stem cell blood, and where it is taken or inferred allowed to be taken from, including the neonate, was set up by the Tri-Council of Canada, involving many levels of groups setting policies and giving out medical grants for research.

There are in the laws, in all countries, various Criminal Codes to protect the newborn's rights. There are Universal Declarations to the protection to the vulnerable child. What I have seen is that those laws are not being upheld as they ought to by the police as to proper investigative research in the hospitals as to unnecessary trends.

This is even including the new trend that once two doctors give a person a fatal disease opinion, the person, without informed consent, is paralyzed and injected with morphines until they die. In Canada, the Federal Government, did not approve of euthanasia, but the policies and Acts put out by Provincial Care and Facilities Act, seem to have given the decision power to doctors, who then direct nurses to carry out their instructions on drugging a person to death, and without an written or witnessed death plan. So we need, a signed birth plan made out by the legal guardians of the child to be born, and a legally signed death plan, when we allow a person to die.

This is a homicide, of course, death not a natural death by a disease. It is happening to the weak, the neonate, the helpless, and the uninformed. What is happening to our democratic societies when few are making the rules to be imposed on others. This is happening to our babies, at birth. Their bodies used in death, as well. Their blood, at birth, extracted by the trend of early cord clamping, kept secret from the public. Directly or indirectly, many levels of the governments are involved. The local hospitals are contracting out this services to private entrepreneurs.

CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION MUST BE SOUGHT ON UNNCESSARY MEDICAL POLICIES AND PROCEDURES, DONE WITHOUT INFORMED CONSENT OR RIGHT TO REJECTION OF THEM:

It is my opinion an unconsented medical intervention of the child's supply of blood deprived without cause or medical benefit to the child, needs to be address in a criminal court of law. Therefore, parents must be alerted of their legal rights to Laying of Information and bringing the policy of the hospital and the doctor, and their societies they belonged to and licensed them, before a Judge. This is simple to do. You do not need a lawyer.

You find the Criminal Law violation and name the medical group's policy used, or training of the doctor, and/or individual involved that endangered your baby, or another's child, you are aware of. You make a written application, to be sworn before a Justice of the Peace. You request, under the Evidence act, for the proper evidence to be collected by the proper authorities, the police and a formal request the matter go to trial for fact finding.

In the death of a child, during a birth, the Coroner's must be immediately notified before the child is buried or cremated. This is so they can do the first inquest, and rule on a homicide, the matter then might go to trial, as well. Civil rights are a backup, if the matter does not go to criminal court.

The Justice of the Peace receives the Sworn Laying of Information. Most Court Libraries can give you a sample and the Criminal Codes that must be completely stated in the allegations. Keep the application as short, as possible, just giving the facts as you know what and where the Evidence can be received by proper investigation. The Evidence Act provides for the records at the hospital to be obtained, and any midwives records, if the child was a homebirth.

The police sometimes need this Laying of Information encouragement to remember Rule of Law in order to investigate medical practices, too, for unnecessary and unconsented and endangering practices, such as the taking organ and blood without informed consent. The police need a special medical investigator to work in maternity wards and check out the babies in the special care units, put there, in many cases by the mothers drugged and followed with hasty clamping, and why the facts are not in the infant's medical charts, particularly, if the child dies.

The police, apparently, are as uninformed as most of the public today as to what the doctors are doing by questionable policies, when the doctors have not reported them false, as is an implied duty to protect the public at large, and to report the endangering of any child. By not reporting false and dangerous and unnecessary medical procedures, not a benefit to the child, it is likely a chargeable offense, even if the child does not die. It is likely a common nuisance, that if a person is convicted is a two year prison sentence.

This hasty clamping if it endangers even one person, must be dealt with. At least that is to the Constitution of our Charter of Rights and Freedoms for equal protection and security of person, and regardless of age, sex, race, color, or social status, or mental or physical disadvantage.

The duty of the Court is to find out the facts as to who are all involved by the permitting of this risk taking and needless medical procedure being done to the child, without informed consent. And can any parent give informed consent to weaken the child, needlessly, and not report it as assault and battery, when they do find out that was an improper medical procedure they did not give informed consent to be done? This done, and without an immediate benefit to the child by blood letting, which is what hasty clamping is involved, really.

Hasty clamping is no difference if you allowed the child full blood allowance until the placenta cord stopped pulsating, then let out 4 to 6 ounces from the child's arm, watching the baby getting weaker, in muscle and tone and strength. That is what hasty clamping is, without the visual impact awareness.

Any medical society or college, may be named, legally, in my opinion. The medical person(s) are to have no privileges by Rule of Law, simply because they belong to a College of Physicians and Surgeons and run like a non-profit corporation. Nor, is any Hospital administrator or Executives on Ethics Boards that were to govern the practices and policies as to no harm done. And what Court would not take away informed choice and equal protection to a person or legal guardian of a disadvantage person or that be taken away by any professional group, that which a Court would not normally take away, knowing all the facts.

Those that knew or ought to have known a harmful practice was going on, along with the person(s) who actually did the procedure and did not report the policy was endangering to a disadvantage group of persons, the newborn child, the neonates, may have vicarious liabilities, criminal and civil. It would not surprise me if the entire memberships of Colleges of the Physicians and Surgeons could not be fined for their silence and allowance of endangering trends to be taught and practiced. See the Krever Report.

This Report was an approved investigation, using the Evidence Act, and required information given to the Judge, by an Official Commissioned Inquiry. We now need an official Inquiry on the practices and trends imposed on women, in maternity matters and the care and the treatment of the newborn child. Doctors and other medical persons must not appear to have special status of not being legally held accountable for false teachings and following illogical teachings, no matter the status and prestige of those directing the practice-trend.

The medical persons, involved in hasty clamping, were following a policy they ought to have reported as endangering, even to causing the death of some babies. By concealment of such endangering they were, in my opinion, accomplices, including the nurses. Policies directing hasty clamping in the States, was Policy #216, November 1995, ACOG; Policy #71, December 1998, and Policy #89 May 2000 of SOGC's.

Those then that might be considered to come before the Judge maybe also the Executives of the College of Physicians and Surgeons, per Province, State, or Territory, to be taken to task, for failing to protect the public. They had an implied duty to know of the new trends that were outside of practical safe and best practice possible.

As part of the public to have equal protection and security of person are the neonates. To not to protect them is to ignore when the child becomes a human being, and thus a citizen. See the Canadian Criminal Codes, when a fetus becomes a human being. What is apparent by early cord clamping is that the newborn child, is actually being discriminated against by age, and mental and physical disadvantage.

The duty by Statutes, and Rule of Law, implies a duty to know who was directing an endangering medical trend to have stopped it in order to have met their mandate to protect the public, the reason of their existence and to be allowed to be self-governing as to training and procedures that insure the public's best medical practices are that, and not needlessly endangering.

SERIOUSLY IMPAIRED CHILDREN, MANY NOW AUTISTIC ADULTS, COST MORE THAN $4 MILLION TO CARE FOR THEIR NEEDS AND TO EDUCATE THEM:

The cost of higher medical costs for internally damaged children is rising, such as each autistic child costs $4 million dollars, many of these children having to be cared for in institutions, at some point in their life. British Columbia and Ontario and Winnipeg are some of the Provinces meeting the needs of autistic children but failing to investigate probable cause going back to the birth care and treatment of such impaired and compromised children, and others, not given a label, but are learning and behavior impaired as well.

Other more subtle impaired and compromised children do not do well in public education costing higher education if they are to be able to learn to read, write, and do any arithmetic, at all.

When a medical person stops the oxygenated circulation system of any child or animal, they will not be the blue ribbon baby that nature intended them to be. They have a legal right not to be deprived of their potential genus cells. In the same way, a corporation sued the Canadian Federal Government for risking potential profits, by focusing on their product being harmful to the public, the Canadian government gave them millions of dollars, in a out of court settlement.

The same is true of any child risked of full right of potential genius cells, that would be impaired by early umbilical cord clamping, and drugging the mother without her informed consent, drugs can cause brain lesions. See The Magical Child, excerpts, pages 48-50.

Trust requires accountability and responsibility of the care and treatment given another persons ward, animal or child. Some vets are unethical and are selling the creatures placenta blood, so contracts with vets are equally important as to the medical persons who are selling placenta and cord stem cell blood to research, cosmetic and drug companies, as well.

Active Management the routine hospital policy, that neglects the parents rights to an unassisted or natural birth:

The good of Policy #71, December 1998 by SOGC allowed for warm water births with the only recommendation that after the birth of the baby in water, the baby is brought out from under the water, immediately. SOGC allowed for gravity births mentioning that flat on the back birth positions were harmful (they forgot to mention, as well, semi-sitting birth positions close. equally. the birth canal by up to 30 percent), a fact known since 1913.

The good in the policy #71, has largely be informed with insufficient training of the doctors and nurses, at most hospitals. It really may be safer to birth your baby, unassisted, in the home, where the timing of the child's birth is in the baby's and mother's care, patiently waiting for nature to bring forth the child, and not drugs and cutting of the mother's body, and the mother having information on gravity birth positions and the choice of a side-ways birth, if she is tired, and to take the edge off contractions by birthing in warm water, a secret many pioneers used, too.

Most of the babies born to mothers of the past three to four generations have been exploited, then, by the hospital's policy to encourage "active management." This procedure uses drugs and medical tools, to deliver the babies. It meets the time schedule and convenience of most medical persons, rather then patience required for a natural, undrugged birth where the mother is in control. Morphine slow down the labor, and the use of oxytocins/pitocin/toesen speed up the labor.

Morphines will mask the harsh oxytocin contractions and how they are severe and long, cutting off the flow of oxygen to the baby, resulting, in some situations a still born child. Even a still born child is best attempted to be revived yet while on the placenta cord. The baby's heart if started up by drugs and massage, will then have the placenta cord start pulsating and transfusing the blood from the placenta into the lungs.

VICARIOUS LIABILITIES IS FOR THE COURT TO RULE ON, WHO IS DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY INVOLVED:

The medical persons and their societies, including the hospital boards, locally, are, directly or indirectly, involved in allowing this to happening to most babies. This implies a vicarious liability. The policies of most hospitals do not require a signed informed birth plan. They are not required to give a list of side effects of the drugs most offered to the women birthing on their premises. The drugs they frequently allow billings for and used on their premises are the morphines and the oxytocins.

The use of any form of Oxytocin requires, by the statement of the World Health Organization (1998 review on maternity matters), immediate cord clamping on the child whose mother is injected with this drug. Or, if she is given another drug that terminates labor or is said to be given to prevent a concern she "may" bleed, too much.

Oxytocin is always alleged, when given after the birth of the baby, or during the birth of the baby to be in the mother's benefit to prevent excessive bleeding to the mother. This is giving medication and treatment without the known facts of need, and present. And, generally, injected without informed consent that the drug can cause the mother's heart not to contract correctly. If true for an adult, what then of the child, too? They then say this is an allergic reaction, the mother also was not warned about to either herself or the child's risk as oxytocin crosses over to the placenta into the child's blood supply.

Generally, excessive bleeding of the mother is being caused by the oxytocin given during labor, to cause a faster labor, and harsher contractions. Sometimes this harsher labor is being masked by the mother also given morphine, and all these drugs cross the placenta and do no good to the baby. Bleeding and breaking of the placenta is also caused by cord contraction, pulling on the cut cord and pressing down on the mother's stomach to get the placenta out before the contractions of the womb close down on it, all caused by oxytocins manipulating the contractions, unnaturally. A trapped placenta requires, then an operation, in some instances.

CONSENT FORMS FOR APPROPRIATE CARE, DO THEY REALLY PROTECT THE MEDICAL INSTITUTION AND MEDICAL PERSON(S)?

What most hospitals and their policy and ethics boards have required the mother to do, as she enters their door of services, is require her to sign a consent form of appropriate care, of which she does not know the endangering side effects or her right to say no, at any time to a medical procedure, including her right to say "No" to the cutting of her body to birth her baby, such as no cutting her body for an episiotomy, or even a c-section.

The mother waives accountability to the medical staff, to reject services. This is all she needs to do, as well as a waiver of accountability to refuse all drugs during labor, or during the birth of her baby. If the mother wants the natural birth, the hospital should provide the allowance for warm water births, proper equipment to facilitate gravity births, and aids to assist the mother to any birth positions she is comfortable and to avoid high operating tables, as unnatural for a natural birth position for her baby.

If they are set up for warm water births as an alternative to drugs, they should likely not be dealing with maternity cases, at all. State of the Art should include undrugged natural births, which provide for safer options to drug use during child birth, and cutting of the woman's body for her to birth a child.

Low mats and beds are the mother's right to have for child birth, and safe equipment to support her weight for birthing in a gravity position. The past and current operating tables and semi-sitting birth beds were only designed for the convenience of doctors who do not like to be on the same level of the mother, if she preferred to birth on a clean mat on the floor, or a low bed.

The high operating tables are not natural, this is not natural birth. They allowed for the doctor his/her convenience to "catch a baby." Some babies were dropped. Had the birth been on the low mat, there would be no harm done. Some babies heads and bodies are twisted by the medical person not knowing how to gently support a child, and they actually are pulling the child from the womb. That is not a natural birth.

HARMFUL BIRTH PRACTICES OF THE PAST THREE AND FOUR GENERATIONS:

Unnatural birth positions, drugs, cutting of the body (allowance of viruses to get into the baby's blood supply), early cord clamping, early vaccinations including injections of Vitamin K, and doing injections of Hep B, and other tests using needles inserted into the child's vein or skin, like a PKU test, are unnatural. Every mother can say "no" to such invasive procedures, as birthing is a natural occurrence and the mother need not have any medical doctor or person touch her body, for a requested and signed for unassisted birth, even in a hospital.

MEXICO PROVIDES FOR UNASSISTED BIRTHS IN HOSPITALS:

Where are unassisted births being done today? In some areas of Mexico, and if there, they may be done everywhere, as long as the mother is informed of her own legal rights of informed choice. This is a mother's legal right to birth, unassisted, even in hospitals.

ARE FORMS SIGNED FOR APPROPRIATE CARE LEGAL DOCUMENTS WAIVING LIABILITIES?

It was a legal opinion, read in a book found in my local Court House that stated signing a form for appropriate care only means a form was signed, not that the mother had her rights to informed medical care and treatment to herself and/or to her child.

Any medical institution that is not having an informed medical document signed for each procedure intended to be imposed on the mother or child. A court may rule that not even one drop be taken from the baby. Such is the case of the Dublin Court ruling doing a PKU test without the parents consent or right to refuse would be a violation on the child and the parental guardianship.

Any hospital or doctors policies or State's policy without a Court approval of that need of a test or care, is all evidence of failure to provide informed choice and rejection of medical services. This is wrong in a believed democratic society, that is to respect the Constitution, and Rule of Law that doctors do not have the last say in medical care and treatment, to any person, including a pregnant mother and the new born child. The courts do. No one can take away our rights, deemed given to us by the Supremacy of God, those natural to parents.

Rule of Law must require the facts of medical services done and how it was, at the time done, a benefit to the person, by the facts of available tests that stated and gave informed choice the need of any services provided in maternity care, not being any exception of respect to the mother for informed choice and alternative and less endangering care to birth her baby, and natural birth is her option and legal rights, for unassisted births, even in hospitals.

Fifty to Sixty Percent of Total Blood Volume Can Be Deprived the Infant:

The amount of blood known to be deprived the child is from 4 to 6 ounces of blood. That can be up to sixty percent of the child's total blood volume. To give an example how serious that is, a nine-pound baby only makes a total amount of 10 ounces of blood, (300 ccs). There is no blood to spare. The blood deprived is actually needed by the baby's expanding lungs.

Many persons on the internet are involved in false guidance saying this is a parent's options or the medical person's choice to deprive the child. The blood by the fetus's circulation (in the womb) bypasses the lungs, and goes directly to the brain, with the most oxygenated blood. Only a little blood then goes back into the lungs. All organs and cells need nutrients from the blood, and oxygen and the removal of wastes.

HARVESTING THE NEONATES BLOOD WITHOUT INFORMED CONSENT OR MEANS TO PREVENT DEPRIVATION:

The baby's deprived blood is then sold by the hospital and/or medical staff to the drug companies, and the research centers, or, in rare situations, the blood may be burned, but only if the mother and the child was sick, and not always in those situations. See the Yurko Project. The amounts of money and compensation for collection of organs and blood tissues received are as to the prevailing rates for sending human blood and the placenta for further centrifugal extraction of the blood components.

LENGTH OF TIME FOR THE BABY'S RECOVERY, IF THE CHILD LIVES:

The baby is weakened (anemic) by hasty clamping and will take from 6 weeks to 6 months before the red blood cells are back to normal quantity. (Reference, Policy #71, December 1998, by The Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada (SOGC). Generally, the baby goes home without the anemia testing. The baby, living and not deformed by blood deprivation, looks normal, but one cannot know the internal damage done to the child.

In that time of reproducing the red cells, the baby can be often sick, if it survives. Some babies die of the Sudden Infant Death Syndrome, and this is one cause of it being anemic, besides endangered to have had minor brain damage to severe from the amount of time the baby was deprived of oxygenated blood. Seizures may be a problem for the child and for the rest of his/her life and/or lung problems. It takes only a minor brain injury to cause SIDS. (Reference World Book, Vol C (Crib Death), p 907, edition 1979), to quote WB, "Researchers. . . have gathered increasing evidence that victims may be born with a slight defect of the central nervous system. This defect may interfere with the nervous system's ability to control breathing, heart function, or both."

We known insufficient blood or lost blood can put a person into shock. For what "good" reason would babies, simply because of their size, be endangered by blood volume deprivation by early umbilical cord clamping? What biology textbooks would direct that teaching or emergency manual or properly educated medical person(s)?

Other problems caused by shortage of blood volume and nutrients, caused by early umbilical cord clamping, is holes in the heart and heart murmurs, and lung problems and infections. Known research indicates that the heart shrinks when there is inadequate volume and pressure of blood flowing through it, and other skin tissues and organs must give up the oxygen and blood volume in them, too. The areas of trouble and injury to the child will be like the throw of the dice. No one will no exactly where the injury may be or how severe.

Drugs harmful to the fetus/neonate, and to the mother, as well:

Other factors known to be problematic to the heart's contraction are the use of Oxytocins/Pitocin/Toesen. (See the references for the books. These are the pharmacopoeias, the books containing a description of drugs and medicines and side effects. These books are accessible to all medical persons, or ought to be, and in likely each hospital's own reference libraries, or at each College of Physicians and Surgeons who are to protect the public, as contracted by them to each government's Provincial and State Acts.

Why Endanger the Newborn Infant? :

Why take the chances? Why not leave the baby's lifeline/hopeline, alone? What possible reason of haste to quicken the third stage of labor can justify the endangering of the child? All babies, even the c-section babies can no have no clamping or cutting of the umbilical cord. This is in proven medical research, see the T. Peltonen report, even c-section babies can be taken out as a sealed, intact unit, not separate or clamped off their lifeline/hopeline.

The clamping and the cutting of the umbilical cord is merely a cosmetic procedure, not a medical need, unless the cord tore or for placenta previa. All other reasons are not necessary, really, and if done, the reasons too, must be quickly investigated. The baby, if not protected by the medical person, who are often indifferent when the cord is clamped, can be protected to compensation, by filing a Civil Writ, for internal damages that will surely be latent.

Legal Rights of the Child for taking civil damages, even in some cases, Laying Criminal Charges:

The child has until the age of 27 years of age to investigate his/her birth situation. All hospitals and medical records must be kept until that age of the child. That is 7 years after the child has become an adult, likely about age 19. Criminal charges may be also considered for assault and battery on the child. Parents can do this by swearing out Laying of Information with the criminal code and who violated it on their infant. Parents are wise to get copies of all care and treatment to the mother and the child "before" leaving the birth center, or allowing the medical person to leave a homebirth or the hospital without all records accurately and factually filed, a copy given to the parents.

What the child has a legal right to know, for understanding of their likely learning difficulties, is the drugs their mother accepted during birth, any informed consent of the consequences of the drug crossing the placenta and harming the child, and the care and treatment of the child, during his/her birth, or after birth treatment and care.

Because a baby lives, and is physically okay, does not mean he or she was not a violated baby, internally. There must be an accounting for the unconstitutionally deprivation of blood and an investigation why the baby was not equally protected and given security of person as to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and the parents right to have had informed choices made known to them, and the intentions of the medical person to interrupt the child's lifeline/hopeline.

No medical person or even the parents should be interfering with the child's circulation system. That is common knowledge to adequately trained and ethical medical persons. Please see this medical web site: www.cordclamping.com

Who is being trained to endangered babies?:

Many medical persons, from 9-1-1- medics, nurses, midwives, and to surgeons have been following the "trend" of immediate and early clamping the cord, blindly. Sixty-percent of midwives alleged they were indifferent to the timing of the clamping of the umbilical cord, taking personal charge of their own self-determination when to clamp the cord and cut it. The clamping was done whether the cord was pulsating or not, and the medical person determined, of not informed choice of the parent(s).

Therefore, using a midwife is not any more safer then using a medical doctor. But some food for thought, doctors do have more better liability insurance to be sued for civil medical malpractice. See the case-laws of Chow and Ing, Ontario, Canada, law firm, Sommers and Roth. The Chow child's blood totally disappeared. It was likely trapped in the placenta and later sold to stem cell blood banks operating, privately, in Ontario. Will we ever know? Will criminal charges ever be taken on that particular case as to the missing blood?

The medical facts of science are that clamping of the umbilical cord is NOT a necessary medical procedure, and only cosmetic, in most instances. Even in the Chow case-law, the child's cord clamped for a tight cord around the neck, there was room for two clamps on the cord, then why not, logically, a first attempt of two fingers between the cord and the neck and to have then allowed full transfusion of blood into the child's lungs, for the child to have had a normal life? In the Ing case-law, the child's circulation system was cut off by mid-forceps used to pull out the child from the womb. In both cases the mothers were drugged by medical allowances.

SILENCE OF OUR POPULATION ON THIS ISSUE OF ENDANGERING THE NEONATES:

It is a harmful trend to the child this hasty clamping and the blood from sick or well babies is being used in research and mostly without informed consent.

Policies directing the endangering practices have been directed by the experts, the Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the Pediatricians have not protested, nor other medical groups, at all. Nor, the ones that have the State, Provincial and Territory duty to protect, the Colleges of Physicians and Surgeons.

What You Can Do to Help Education the Next Parent's To-Be:

An invitation to be a Charter Member in The Blue-Ribbon-Baby-Birth Centers Society, a non-profit society, is shared at the end of this message. A special lifeline "Charter Member" to assist in getting the non-profit society is offered at $25.00 USA funds. This donation, and to state active or inactive membership, will help this web site to continue.

We are seeking the membership from mothers and grandmothers, and any interested medical persons who agree best practice possible, least risk of harm, is the duty of all medical persons, involved in the care of the pregnant lady, and the care and treatment of the child during labor, and after birth.

Why Help?:

Serious consequences is easily prevented by stopping the on-going trend to do early clamping and then cutting the cord, allowing for viruses to get in any cut cord. The child's wrongful blood deprivation can actually be measured to be 20 to 50 percent total blood volume, or 180 ccs, between 4 to 6 ounces.

Again, a nine-pound baby only makes a total 10 ounces of blood. This is not done with informed consent, in most cases by the parents. The doctors to do this risk taking, did not have a court order to approve to endangering to any child, premature, c-section or a normal delivery. Why have many involved made many children second-class citizens. They required of the baby to donate his/her blood to another, and or to science. If true, what was the compensation to the medical persons involved, or even perhaps to the parent of the child? What duty did they have for compensation to the child so deprived of what was intended for that child by nature?

How did the medical experts not know this endangering and constitutional deprivation to the infant in their medical training sessions, medical ethics and the law -- do no harm? Again, this is not opinion. Again, there are the visual facts of evidence, the blood trapped in the placenta. Again, the medical records and billings allow for the check of any lab draining of the placenta by some medical person or researcher.

In many cases, that is the hospital where the birth took place, taking a shared accountability to care and treatment to the child, when it is not best practice possible and least endangering to the child. It is not a matter, the child felt no pain, in the opinion of some. Ask any heart attack victim, did they suffer pain when their heart muscle for a short time received no oxygen and blood to it? Was their pain in other parts of their body, they as an adult can express, but not so a baby, imposed on by circulation being stopped by a clamp?

And the draining from the placenta, for whatever reasons, most of the blood taken without informed consent, or where the placenta went for disposal as a well kept secret being done at most hospitals, world wide. Why is that, if this is not an organized medical care and treatment trend, planned by the experts, and by policy, they are identified as the executives of ACOG and SOGC, the obstetricians and gynecologists, with the exceptions of those who have documented articles this is harmful to babies being imposed on by early clamping, false positions of birth, drugging, and early vaccinations while the babies are in an anemic condition.

What could be their motives, other than that the baby's blood is wrongfully being taken for science research ( Stem Cells)? This collection of blood and this is done without "informed" parental consent or means to stop the hasty clamping, or any clamping off the cord at all, unless the cord tore or for placenta previa.

This medical assumption of treatment is breach of fiduciary trust and a constitutional violation to the infant and owner of the placenta and blood. The placenta is the baby's organ developed for his/her security of life. The placenta is NOT the mother's organ. This sometimes is falsely portrayed by misguided mothers and perhaps medical teachers even in science. Not so. Full DNA will reveal the tissues of the baby's and the facts of science reveal the development of the placenta is part of the baby's development and for his/her blood supply as the child grows.

See the Yurko Project, in the Index of Contents) This is an example that the father was accused of a Shaken Baby Syndrome. My best guess of what this baby died of was he was misdiagnosed and treated when taken in for what was likely a diabetic coma, caused by a virus infection, likely by too many vaccinations in a baby, premature, and yet anemic at two months of age. See: http://www.freeyurko.bizland.com/albayati3.html

The facts revealed are:

There was inadequate investigation of the child's general health and factors at birth, 5 weeks premature, the doctor doing a hasty induction and termination of the pregnancy for the reason of low amniotic fluid. I have read this fluid can be encouraged to be increased without induction and termination of the pregnancy.

The child still being anemic was given 6 vaccinations. The child who was still in a weakened condition and not of normal 2 months of age length or size.

The live viruses from the vaccinations, likely brought on a predisposition of diabetes to the child, the mother had gestation diabetes.

They now believe the vaccinations contained mercury, or some of them, adding to a weak baby's problems.

It is not known if Vitamin K or Hep B was injected into this baby at birth. Most likely one or both were.

(See the recent Statement by the Canadian Pediatric Society on MMR, CBC, List of Contents, Feb 21, 2003).

The doctors involved at the father's trial, alleging child battery, took no responsibility in fact finding, of the child's birth history and continued lung problems.

All known information of a distressed birth was not presented at the trial.

It is not known if the jury was given the Coroner's report showing false information, such as alleging the child was black, when the parents were both white, and the wrong head size, and statements on the condition of the child's organs, when already removed for organ transplants and/or research, taken from a very sick child.

The baby's organs were sought and removed before the autopsy. The father was already arrested for battery on the child, and the mother was to be charged as an accomplice. The child was cremated. It is not known if finances were a factor to cremation of the child. The first born child, a daughter was removed from her care, as a feared endangered child. The daughter was brought back to the mother "after" the daughter was alleged molested while in care of the State. (Info from a personal letter signed by Alan Yurko).

Doubts remain if the baby's smaller head measured after death, being smaller then birth, was actually caused by taking out of any brain cell tissue for stem cell cultivation and not an accidental measuring error. The brain cells would be removed through the nasal passages, an Egyptian method, unless the total brain had been removed for autopsy. This method would not leave scalp incision scars.

If the child had a disease and the cells used, that shows continued negligence of placenta blood taken and organs from a diseased child, if they, too, were used in transplantations. The public was not protected in organ or blood banks.

Note: See RCMP Blood Task Force. Endangering the public, or common nuisance, Section 180 of the Canadian Criminal Code. Criminal charges are now being taken against one American Drug Company and the Canadian Red Cross and the doctors who were directors. Endangering the public and bodily assault are charges against them. This Krever Report, revealed the medical person(s) knowingly allowed bad blood tissues to be used in the public's blood bank supply and failed to warn the public.

Another Example of an Inquiry leading to Criminal Charges is the Walkerton water contamination. The officials responsible for the care and treatment of the water have now been criminally charged. These officials, too, failed to warn the public, simply "boil your water." Those involved all do not want to be held accountable or responsible for withholding protecting information as high paid officials seeking exemption from Rule of Law.

References to the Krever Report, Canada's Blood Supply . This was a Federal Order in Council Commission of Inquiry.

I am suggesting the need of a Commission of Inquiry on Maternity Matters and the Care and Treatment to the Neonate. This would include the practice and trend of "active management" which drugs the mothers and babies during child birth, and tools to draw the child out of the womb, rather then undrugged, warm water births, and no clamping of cutting of the child's lifeline/hopeline.

PREVENTION: When toxin containing vaccinations are stopped and wrongful birth rituals in the use of drugs, and more help for supporting natural no drugged births, perhaps the deaths of babies and sick babies, will stop being medically caused, and evidence concealed and covered-up.

The duty, now routinely not being done, is to provide all details of the birth to be factually recorded on the child's medical charts by all involved. This means by separate reports, including nurses who have remained silent to what they have repeatedly witnessed and the differences of medical practices, of what was witnessed and done to the mother and child, including c-sectioned baby.

Routinely, as to the current "trend" not facts of good science, the c-section babies are immediately umbilical cord clamped, as are vaginal birth babies.

THE FOLLOWING IS A NATURAL AND LOGICAL MOTHER'S AND GRANDMOTHER'S OPINION FOR LATER CLAMPING OR NO CLAMPING AND CUTTING OF THE UMBILICAL CORD, AT ALL.

The child is weakened by blood deprivation by clamping, or tying off the pulsating cord. The child can go into shock causing a heart attack and die. Also, the components in the placenta and in the blood contained there, when taken by the medical person, for their policy-of-blood samples and collections, can be used to test the family's entire genetic background. No one knows the ethics of those who have this information, or how they will use it against some races.

That testing of body tissues is being done by some labs without informed consent. Doctors and labs are not disclosing their interest in the body tissues. (See the John Moore Case, at www.123-baby-birth.com link below).

No one has to agree to any medical policy that infringes on your own constitutional rights. You do not have to submit your child for blood collection, or samples taken, at birth. The sampling, depending how done, can endanger the child to blood infections. Why risk it? The blood typing can be done, if done, from dried blood samples. The cord need not be pulsating to take a blood sample. The blood can be taken from the vein from the expelled placenta, after all pulsation has ceased, and hours after the child's birth.

Make the medical persons submit their policy, as to their demands on the legal guardian of the child, to a court of law, and their hospital, nurses, and/or medical policies, too. Many of these policies are dangerous and should be looked at by a Judge. The policies are avoiding, so far, checks and balances according to Rule of Law and Charter of Rights of equal protection and security of person. Many of the medical persons have been improperly directed as to how far they can go with "policies" dealing with another person's rights or treatment to an infant.

It appears few persons in the general public know the ethics of those who have the possession of such personal and private body cells and how races may be prejudiced for man-made-time-bomb genetic-directed and caused disorders. (Read the Ethical Canary by Margaret Somerville).

In any case, someone in science research has access to the human tissue cells, which is taken from the baby's placenta blood. This collection of cells is valued by medical fields, mostly for the stem cells. This blood collection taken from the baby's placenta is likely coming back into the blood supply as various extracted components. When human blood or organs are taken without informed consent, it is a Constitutional and civil privacy violation. It is likely a criminal violation to the child, who has been wrongfully prejudiced against by reason of mental and physical disadvantage not able to protect himself/herself. The child has been weakened and endangered. (see Criminal Codes in the List of Contents, like bodily harm).

A constitutional violation has occurred by clamping a cord even when its pulse is weak for any reason, other then stated above. Any other condition can be corrected when properly tested for and the parents agree to have blood-letting as the cure. What adult has 60 percent of his blood drained to cure toxins in the blood or for fears of too much blood, too thick of blood, or for jaundice. Other remedies, other then blood-letting , are done for the adult. Therefore, for security of person and equal protection, these same safer methods must be done for the newborn child, too.

Blood deprivation at birth has wrongfully stopped placenta blood from going into the infant's now expanding lungs, before the child shut down the transfusion, internally, when they are satisfied they have received all their needs, as they made the blood for their own size of person. This the infants have been doing since the beginning of time, if the adult does not do unnecessary interruption.

See above for the only two visual reasons, to clamp a cord which must be quickly remedied by likely a vein to vein transfusion, if the child's blood was not contaminated; or another source of blood transfusion, having the same fate or fear of disease in the transfused blood. A commonly taught trend is to excuse cord clamping for a tight cord around the neck. This is false reasoning. The cord is actually 22 inches long and it lengthens, as the child is being born.

A pulsating, firm red tight cord, wrapped around the child's neck, even up to 5-times, is still giving oxygen transfusion and completing the gas exchange to the placenta and supplying the child's needs. The child is NOT breathing through his neck, nose, mouth, instantly, at birth, in most instances. The logical correction for a tight cord is knowledge that the cord is about 22 inches long and that by wiggling an adult's fingers between the neck and the cord, the infant's neck will be prevented from injury. This logically allows the oxygenated blood to continue to nourish the child. Otherwise, the child is going to be impaired by clamping and cutting the cord for the reason it was around the child's neck. See the Chow-Case-Law, Ontario, Canada, at www.123-baby-birth.com. link at end.

This correct procedure will loosen the cord as it lengthens, then, the baby can be unwound from the cord, after the child is completely born. For the vaginal birth, even waiting for the placenta to be born, and all pulsation ceases in the cord, before clamping, must be told to the mother as her means to protect her baby. The duty is to the child, and there is no danger to the mother to leave the pulsating cord alone, to nourish her baby, or babies, if twins. Same process, more hands, but the same process.

A twin must not have his/her pulsating cord clamped for the belief it must be put aside for the benefit of the other, yet to be born. More hands, are needed. Generally, twins have their own separate placentas, and baby's determine how much blood they need for their size. Man should not guess, this important detail for the child to have a quality of life with proper nourishment in full blood volume transfusion.

The mother must be told no clamping or cutting of the cord is necessary, and that if it is done, there is always a risk of viruses and bacteria getting in the cut cord, causing hernias, and painful infections, requiring drugs to clean that up. It is best to avoid that process, or wait until the mother is at home from the hospital. The hospital is a place where there are many bacteria, germs and viruses, present. The clamping of the cord, and cutting it (no clamp for a cord ceasing to pulsate is actually necessary) is a simple procedure, but better is to allow nature to let the placenta and cord fall off in 2-3 days, time. How to remove the placenta and cord, if done, is as follows:

THE UMBILICAL CORD CONDITION IF CLAMPED/CUT:

The cord, if to be clamped and cut, must have sanitarily cleaned hands and to use boiled instruments (scissors), boiled string and to put iodine on them and on the area of the umbilical cord where the cord will be cut. One must take care not to spill iodine on the child, as it may burn his/her delicate skin. The cord's condition when to clamp for cutting will be white/silver, limp, not pulsating and the child's lips and tongue will not be blue. After cutting, allow the cut cord to have as much airing as possible, perhaps, gently, covered with clean cheese cloth.

Warning: The cut umbilical cords allow for the risk of infections and take from 8 days to 2 weeks to heal. Unclamped cords and placenta are off, generally, in three days time, if the placenta and cord are given proper airing, and no risk of navel hernias, or blood infections were reported by the early pioneers using this method of care, or those doing this practice, currently.

Note: Newborn Babies do NOT have to be bathed. They are normally, covered with a white protective covering, Vernix caseosa. It is absorbed within a few hours. Downy hair, lanugo, covers the skin and is plentiful over the shoulders, upper arms and thighs. The baby's general color, depending on origins is pink to white, to olive or dark brown.

Color of the Baby, at Birth: Peripheral cyanosis (bluish) color is common at birth. This is because the baby's fetal circulation has carbon dioxide mixed with the oxygen provided from the mother's system, through the placenta and cord vein. The fetus brain gets the purest form of oxygen first, in the womb.

The fetus's blood mostly by-passes the lungs travelling through the foramen oval, to the left atrium, down to the ventricle and up to the aorta through the ductus arteriosus, this freshest oxygenated blood then nourishes the brain and the central nervous system. The brain is the fetus's priority for oxygenated blood, in the womb and at birth. Hasty clamping interrupts the transition from fetus circulation to adult and holes in the heart of the temporary windows do not close for inadequate volume and pressure. That is logical. No babies have holes in their heart , in these windows, if full delayed cord clamping is provided for them.

Revival of the baby who is not breathing. Long before the birth of the baby, this should have been discussed and have been part of the signed birth plan. Best Practice Possible, Least Endangering to the Child is:

First, leave the child on his umbilical cord, and left with the placenta, even if that is still in the mother's womb or birth canal.

Revive the baby, where is and how is, and this must be explained to the mother and the reasons why.

The baby, at birth, is first put in a warm towel. This is because cold is as effective as a cold knife cutting the cord, thus, the cord, by coldness of the air, can be caused to stop pulsating. The room that the baby was born in, should have been the warmest and cleanest available. (See Emergency Birth a Teenager can handle).

Clean away mucus with a clean cloth or hand: With the baby's head and face down, heels up higher, secured not to be risked dropped, the feet higher then the child's head, then massage gently his/her throat removing mucus from mouth and nose, and massage gently the back, and patting the heels, sometimes helps. Sometimes holding baby upside down, while still on the pulsating cord is okay too, if the baby is secured not to slip from the hands.

If the cord is not pulsating, the heart is not beating, likely, either, so then Massage the heart until the heart begins again. In a hospital birth, drugs may be available to help the heart and counteract other drugs affecting the baby's breathing. This done, the umbilical cord will then continue the transfusing of the placenta blood, until the child is satisfied.

A compromised child, weakened during birth, will take longer to transfuse the blood, particularly, a drugged child.

Dr. Mavis Gunther reported that the pulsation of the cord took as long as twenty minutes for a drugged baby.

So why rush the child's complete birth process by premature clamping when known internal harm is known to be caused.

Bonding is important to the mother and child. This is best done while the child is still attached to the placenta and cord, even with the placenta still inside the womb. . . this is the marvel of the length of the cord, 22 inches, some longer. The baby on his/her cord will actually reach the mother's breast. She can keep the baby warm. The baby can snuggle at the breast. Rituals of weighing and measuring can be left for later. They need not be a fire drill, routinely, done.

When the pulsation of the cord is finished and the placenta is expelled (still with the baby), the baby, at about one-half hour after birth is going to be famished, and ready to be nursed.

It is cruel to separate mother and the baby. Sometimes the medical persons have kept them separated for 12 hours, thinking the baby did not need any nourishment. How cruel, and not loving either. These are the rituals we must protest. It is not natural and most unkind. These were arbitrary decision imposed on mother and child. The law does not permit that. Civil and sometimes criminal charges are now being take against the medical professionals.

They must improve their training and care in all maternity matters, including, some of the training to the midwives, including registered-nurse-midwives, most likely to adopt some of the false policies set by experts, the obstetricians and gynecologists, who do not all have training in the natural birth processes. They best know drugs and knives. They have not been trained without their invasively medical interventions: drugs, knives, immediate cord clamping.

It is for this reason natural blue-ribbon-baby-birth-centers must help women birth naturally, with gravity positions, water births, no drugs and no clamping of the lifeline.

Again, after birth, the babies will quickly pink up after all blood transfusion from the placenta is inside the baby's lungs, so he can then start breathing. This breathing, again, is done while the baby remains on his/her placenta and cord. It is most cruel to detach the baby with an attitude, off your lifeline/hopeline, child, breathe, or else. That test has witnessed many babies going limp, gasping, and pain in their chest for lack of oxygenated blood. How cruel.

WARNING: APGAR score. Babies should not be taken off their lifeline, just to be tested by this APGAR score. That is not logical. It is common sense, to leave the child on the lifeline, managing the child with his current needs. The medical persons should not be worried about writing down the appearances on a test score, after they have taken the baby off his/her hopeline, the umbilical cord.

The test score of APGAR was designed for drugged babies. HOME births of the Pioneers did things logically. Birth is logical: Warm the baby in a receiving blanket, leave the cord alone, give the child to the mother for immediate bonding. Healthy babies, undrugged, get 10 out of 10 without revival. Drugged babies early clamped have low APGAR score, mostly because they "are" off their lifelines, deprived of nutrients of their oxygenated blood, even if drugged. Drugged blood is likely better then no blood. So why is the mother drugged if she is free to move around and have a warm water birth and the birth aid of her choice?

HOW THE CHILD'S PLACENTA VEINS AND ARTERIES CLOSE DOWN:

When the placenta has released all the blood through the vein (the arteries shut down), the baby is going to continue to breathe without interruption. When the arteries close down, first, that means the blood is not going back into the placenta to drop off carbon dioxide.

The baby will soon be breathing on his own to oxygenate his own blood. He/She is still being subsidized by the placenta getting oxygen from the mother's system, if the placenta is still attached in the womb.

The vein is still bringing in the blood from the placenta. And when the placenta is empty of the blood, the baby's own internal vessels to the vein, will close internally.

The baby, then is prepared to be now fully on the adult circulation system. But the cord does not need to be clamped and cut for any medical ideas of cosmetic surgery. It is now white, limp and not pulsating.

Leave it alone, because to cut it off is only cosmetic surgery. That amputation can bring germs and cord infections.

The Pioneers did not have drugs to fight infections. Drugs are unhealthy to give to a newborn. So don't detach the cord. Learn the natural way. The cord will soon dry and the placenta. It will fall off in 2 or 3 days, with a perfect navel. NO infections.

This Pioneer method, no clamping/cutting of the cord, now called the Lotus Birth, must be told all mothers and the logic of it. Most mothers never heard of what their Grandmother's did. But no clamping the cord was never abandoned in the Third World Countries. But these Third World Countries are being deceived in small villages.

The uneducated villagers are being "visited" and are taught the Western ways of early cord clamping and when done in their homes, the babies are now getting cord infections and dying a terrible painful and long death. Millions of them.

A similar type of population control was set on these villages by those taking milk formulas that needed clean water and refrigeration. These milk-formula-babies died of internal organ disorders, not likely any different then the Canadian Walkerton, Ontario, contaminated "water" deaths. Whereas, they thrived on sanitary breast-milk that had been the natural means of survival of these villagers. A wise old adage is, "If it isn't broken, don't fix it."

The mother who had advocated boycotts, Catherine Young, now deceased, advocated to boycott Nestles. It was a dying wish. She asked this because Nestles are doing that again . . . sending formulas and taking babies off the breast milk. Babies in small villages are once again dying along with those babies infected by their now cut cords where before they left the cords and placentas alone. Now these villagers have two problems to cause them very painful population control, as I see it, a gift from the Western societies.

These villages do not have the knowledge or the means for the drugs that would curb these disorders brought on them by changes in their customs. I believe it is the Western societies who have turned, blindly, from wisdom of natural survival. We err but in trying to save face suffer from hubris , failing to correct or admit our mistakes, even on our own people.

See the World Health Organization, list of contents and Dupont's Clamp. These Third World Country villages do not have the drugs, and it is unkind to teach Western ways when they do not know Western Society treat cut cords with drugs. (See Mother to Mother for C. Young's concerns, list of contents. Note, we were not related).

Put the wiped off and unclamped/uncut placenta in a diaper. I recommend putting the placenta first in salted water (that was previous boiled and cooled), pat it dry with clean towels and put it in a cheese cloth and air as much as possible.

See Dr. Sarah Buckley's experiments. Best is to air the placenta and cord, and keep the pets away from the child, and visitors too.

Read the story of the Vancouver Island child, see list of contents. The three days are mom's and dad's and baby's bonding time. Rest is good for all.

A BLUE RIBBON BABY HAS HEALTHY INTERNAL ORGANS THAT NOT ONE DROP OF OXYGENATED BLOOD WAS DEPRIVED THE CHILD:

Gentle births do not have their babies born in pain. They are born in warm water, and no cord clamping, and the receiving arms are the natural mothers. The birth is not contrived with drugs of any kind. No one has to do anything. Even the amniotic water membrane need not be broken in a Natural birth. But if the water broke during birth, it is necessary to then remove the placenta's membrane from the baby's face.

Warning : It is dangerous to break the water because the flushing out of the water can cause the cord to be birthed before the child. This may cause a compressed cord and the child may be suffocated to death before he/she is born.

Again, natural is best, in all managements of the child's birth. It has been perfected and is trust worthy. Who is taking responsibilities for man's choices?

Again, leaving the umbilical cord transfusion alone will provide the baby with healthy lungs, a healthy heart and brain and central nervous system. And he/she will have blood nourishment and a strong iron supply to continue carrying oxygen to all cells, and for proper enzymes and hormones and glands to be working. All that nutrient is in the blood.

Caution : The blood in the placenta is not extra blood, it was designed to be there to be transfused into the lungs. Why? Because, before birth, the lungs were being by-passed by the means of a window, called the foramen ovale and another called the ductus arteriosus. They will, now, with proper blood pressure and volume, close.

INJURED BABIES LIVING AND WHO DIED:

If you check the baby's with holes in their heart by the foramen ovale and ductus arteriosus not closing, one will probably find the mother was drugged during labor by morphines, and oxytocins, and this was followed by early cord clamping of the child's umbilical cord.

Those babies deprived of both volume and pressure of sufficiency of blood transfusion, by early clamping, will likely have many internal problems, learning problems, and behavior problems. (See Index of Contents, Epidurals & Oxytocins prolong labor).

In all such cases, I suggest the parents file a Writ in the child's name, to those who set forth the policy, without informed choice or warning of possible endangering, logically, perceived, if known and could have been avoided.

And if the child was knowingly seen to be early clamped at birth, on a firm, red, and pulsating umbilical cord, I would file the next day, charging with assault and battery if the above two reasons, (1) cord tore and/or (2) placenta previa, were not the cause for immediate clamping. And, in particular, if a back up to give the blood back to the child, vein to vein, was not properly prepared for such emergencies. Particularly, if done in a hospital, where they are "expected" to have been prepared for any emergency of a child's birth. They are expected to have the proper services that might be expected for any child's birth.

They are expected to have properly trained experts who known how to provide the safest and least endangering procedures for maternity care and services. If that is not true, and apparently it is true they are failing in their duties, then home births are no less a risk and are likely safer for the convenience of the mother and child. If so, the mothers must be trained how to deliver their own babies, even prior to getting pregnant. The duty of facts of science is to the older generation(s) to provide the best known information that provides for best practice possible, least risk of endangering.

Did the hospital or birth center have the provisions and skills to provide for this service for proper equipment and supplies, there, in the birth room? (See the 1993 edition of "A Child is Born," by Lennart Nilsson. This book demonstrates, by a picture, a routine ritual of a nurse and an aid rushing a child to the intensive care ward.

That particular hospital was doing this rather then the equipment being provided for any emergency that may happen unexpectedly, during a birth, in the same room the child is delivered. If one is going to birth their baby in any institution, they should first check it out it is properly prepared to do this kind of service, or if the staff has adequate skills to revive the baby, where is, how is, in between-the-legs of the mother. This must be a Birth Plan Signed informed consent or informed rejection of taking the child from his/her own lifeline.

Alert : This 1993 edition directs "immediate cord clamping" as the new standard treatment of all babies born. Of course this is a medical hoax.

Note: Dr. Lennart Nilsson was made an "honorary doctor" at the time he wrote the 1993 edition, A Child is Born.

Perceived Duty of Experts in the Medical Services:

If the hospital and staff are not knowledgeable about these risks and possible injury to the child, internal, not seen, but perceived by those who are informed, then there is no more danger to birth in the time convenience of one's own home, then to seek out the services of experts, at hospitals.

There is sufficient evidence that the hospitals are not prepared or trained in facts of empirical medicine/science as they want the public to believe and to trust their services. What is perceived are the added risks of child birth by " active management " which is totally outside of natural child birth.

What is perceived, while policies of the experts, example Policy #78, December 1998, of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada (SOGC), approved of warm water births, the institutions, as to their presently trained staff who have not kept up with current training and suggestions are NOT prepared for a warm water birth provided.

The matter of refusing all hospitals to provide for this requires informed women to then provide for birthing of their babies in the security of their own homes, with assistance from those they believe have their best interest of the mother and child for protection of no unnecessary interventions of what is deemed to be a low risk and natural birth.

More women are opting for unassisted births in their own homes, and a recent candlelight laboring in warm water, followed by a birth of her large baby, on dry land, is available at this website: http://www.recordsontheblock.com/familywebpage/birth.htm

This women-to-women sharing, abundantly, now on the Internet, demonstrates how informed women, educated on homebirth, are going back to the emancipated freedom of her grandmother, the pioneers of Canada and the United States. The benefits were reduced medical costs and a healthy baby, who likely would have been injured had she birthed by "active management" policies in an institution, governed by the experts of the day.

The new mother has had a positive birth experience to take to her grave. Her photos have left a shared heritage to pass on to her children and the world of what a safe secure homebirth is all about. How lovely it was, and so to her own convenience and her child's, that would not have been provided in the cold, indifferent hospital's environment, where, a zillion experts would be running around and would have disturbed her, poked her, examined her.

This would have been her fate, perhaps even a $10,000 c-section, unless she went to a hospital planning to put a "doorstop" behind her door, with a Waiver posted on the hospital's door: "Do Not Disturb -- an Unassisted Birth is in Progress!" "We'll Call the Experts, if Needed." Thank you. Only some parts of Mexico are providing such unassisted births in their hospitals.

THE WAVE OF THE FUTURE - EMERGENCY BIRTHS ONLY NEED APPLY AT ALL HOSPITALS:

Hospitals simply cannot compete for the rights of the mother for undrugged warm water births, and natural care of the child. Therefore, the hospitals must concentrate, perhaps, only in emergency births, requiring c-sections. The $20 billion dollar expense, at least in the United States, will be reduced and the Western Society will have healthier babies if we ladies become educated and copy the Pioneer's examples: Water births, no chemical drugs, and in the home and at the convenience of the mother's and the child's timing. You can't beat natural. It has its own master plan.

We must have a review of the "active management" using drugs. They may be the root cause of the higher medical costs and internal injuries to most persons born in the last three generations in Western Society. A government Commissioned Inquiry on Maternity Matters is long overdue and who governed the training of the medical society and why they remained silent for so long, and why those in charge had the support of false directives in Encyclopedias, Biology Textbooks, Medical Emergency Books, and Medical Policy and Educational Manuals for so long.

There must be an explanation that an Inquiry will discover and deal with any criminal negligence to those responsible. Criminal trials are for punishment. Civil is for financial compensation to all victims deprived of security of person and equal protection. That is what democracy is all about, that no injustice goes unopposed, no matter how many are involved, or how long ago secrecy was involved in the medical institutes in our Western Societies.

WHO CAN FILE A WRIT FOR A BIRTH INJURY:

The legal guardian of the minor, or it can be a child's Next Friend, or a birth witness, they can investigate if the baby's deprived blood just happened to be burned or sent for research and why the amount of blood in the placenta was not witnessed as it was drained and recorded as to any tests done on the blood.

Filing and keeping accurate and detailed records of the child's birth during labor and during the delivery and after delivery are the assigned duties of standards of practice by all medical persons. I would think that true of 9-1-1 counsellors and the ambulance medics, as they too, today, are directed to clamp the cord while it is still pulsating.

The reasons do not fit the two visual said reasons that fit the criteria to be a benefit to the child. The medics do not have magic in their guess when a child has had sufficient blood, and if they are not prepared to do, on the spot, vein to vein transfusion, back into the child for a child going limp and gasping, they have, in fact, committed manslaughter for unnecessary intervention, if the child died.

The duties of keeping written facts of care and treatment, and copy given and signed for by the legal guardian of the child, are the duties of doctors and nurses. They must do independently filing of separate and detailed reports of the child's birth process and treatment of the cord, the timing of the clamping of the cord, the cutting of the cord, and the condition of the cord were clamped are details that should never ever be left off the child's medical chart.

If they are, the doubt for failure to keep facts of written records, the jury and/or judge must rule in favor of the victim-child, as to the statement of the witnesses at the child's birth, likely the mother to know if the child was clamped, the cutting then done later. The clamp stopped the functioning of the otherwise pulsating cord.

The clamping, not the cutting, is what deprives the child of volume and pressure of blood going into the baby's lungs. The clamp put on the pulsating cord, at the will and determination of the medical person, is an action that must have responsibilities and accountability to the persons wielding the tool, either as a benefit to the child (said reasons when to clamp) or as a weapon to do internal harm, even death of the child. No one held a gun to the medical person's head on their decision making powers, and if they wrongfully clamped and failed to provide for the equal protection and security of person of the infant, they must be held accountable.

DUTIES TO BE A REASONABLE THINKING PERSON:

Can the trained medical person, with a certification of proper training, say, it was this book, that author, this publisher rather than to have known their duty to have checked out the information, independently, as to its reasonableness as an adult, deciding the fate of another's child?

How did they know of a sickness present in the 30-second time period they clamped a functioning organ? How did they know what the draining out of the placenta, they took dutifully back to the hospital would reveal 20 to 50 percent total blood volume, perhaps, more, deprived to the child, by their decision, only, to clamp a functioning and pulsating organ?

What will their excuse be, if the child died, having no means to correct a limp and gasping child, now off his/her own lifeline, with no backup, once detached from that personal lifeline? Are the publishers and the author of the book or any school district providing wrongful information to be charged with aiding and abetting false medical directives, a medical practice told for others to do, if they were trained falsely? That is a decision, yet, in the future, should the matter be an issue for the Court to decide of a wrongful death.

VICTIMS OF FALSE MEDICAL MALPRACTICE TRENDS:

A living child after surviving drugs and early clamping can still be a violated and battered child. External appearances when internal exams are available and blood counts as to anemia by blood deprivation are what our society can confirm.

Those provable tests ought to be standard by testing the placenta's quality of blood, and the actual content of red cells in the child a few hours later.

Was the blood count of red cells and white cells sufficient to keep the child healthy and strong, as would be for a normal birth and pregnancy? This is particularly true, when the supply of nutrients was trapped in the placenta, when nature intended that volume and nutrients in the child's blood to be inside his/her own body.

What would a Judge and Jury say? That answer by the facts reviewed in a Court of Law is yet to happen as the Western Society begins to review training and practices of the medical persons and their trends of care to the pregnant mother and child. And, most important, as to the Commission of Inquiry on the Blood Supply in Canada, who would they find the mid-directing the care of the maternity services, and the miss-information in the Biology books resulting in harmful birth experiences in Canadian hospitals. This is causing our higher medical costs and educational costs for damaged children?

This is by no means the fault of the parents, who trusted in no harm done, if they went into medical institutions for better services. It would seem it would be to return to unassisted home births, the mother attended by her own family and friends she best trusts.

TWENTY-MINUTE OR LONGER PATIENCE IS NEEDED WITH BABY'S UMBILICAL CORD, THE LIFELINE/HOPELINE:

Until the cord is limp and white/silver, the baby's oxygen and exchange of carbon dioxide were continued outside the womb, as was the process within it. The placenta, inside the womb, will not be normally detached for about 12 to 20 minutes later.

These facts of science can be witnessed for placenta birthing animals. It is necessary, for the public to understand this natural birth process and to encourage their doctors to switch from chemicals and knives, to natural birth as the pioneers wisely performed them, and by unassisted births, in most cases.

The babies born around the mid 1900's are still fine and well, starting off as blue-ribbon-babies, no drugs, no episiotomies, (c-sections at 3- to 5 percent of all births), many of the infants had no tied or cut cords. The mother's nursed their babies, and bond at birth, the baby given to them, not taken away in home births. This was followed with pollution free fresh air, clean water, and chemical free home-grown foods.

Drugs used in Labor induction vs Red Raspberry Leaves : Doctors use "active management" This controlled policy, set by medical experts and many may have interest in drug companies, uses drugs to manipulate the child's birth. Generally, that is done for the convenience of the hospital's staff and a busy doctor. The birth slowed by morphines gives the staff breathing space. When all are ready, the oxytocins are brought in. The mother and the fetus are carefully monitored, to the degree of distress a fetus may take, before the doctor is called for the delivery of the baby. It may now require a c-section if the baby indicates distress. If the baby does not indicate distress, or the monitoring is not careful when dealing with termination of pregnancy drugs (oxytocins are abortion drugs), the baby may be seriously impaired, or born stillborn.

For these reasons, mothers are recommended to get educated to consider a home-birth, or at least labor at home, not entering the hospital, if that is the mother's choice, until her contractions are close together. The mother then needs education to know how to check her own opening of her cervic. We do have mirrors in our Western society.

If the mother is opting for "security" of a hospital birth, it is her legal right to give the hospital a Waiver of responsibilities, and to insist she be allowed to have an unassisted birth on the hospital premises and with their own chosen birth witness(es).

This too should be long settled before the due date, and if necessary, by a Court Order of the mother's right for this unassisted, hands off birth, even in a hospital. If the experts fear for the well being of the mother, unassisted birth, on hospital premises are most logical. The busy experts time are not infringed on unless the mother does actually need help of an unpredictable nature. Then the mother's birth plan, must still be honoured to make the decision what and what not that assistance may be.

Again, the drugs commonly used in the hospital births, and by some midwives in homebirths, are the morphines and the oxytocins. Morphines slow the labor down and Oxytocins speed it up. Both can be harmful to the mother and the child. Long-term effects should be watched for and comparisons done on the progress and well-being of the child, in particular, as to learning problems of any kind, or internal problems. Such problems must have some consideration by consented to comparison records that provides, with consent of human experiments involving:

The drugging of the mother during labor.

The position of birth (flat on the back and semi-sitting most harmful to mother and child).

The drugging the mother while the baby is being born (injections of oxytocins).

The use of medical equipment, forceps and vacuums.

The cutting the woman's body (episiotomy).

The drugs used for a c-section.

The details and why's for immediate and early clamping, time done and position of the child's body when clamp (example head born, head and shoulders, or whole body of child born).

The condition of the cord when clamped, red, firm and pulsating; or 20 minutes later, white/silver, limp and not pulsating.

Long-Term Risk Factors Recorded: There must be documented checking of the progress of a child, known or checked to be anemic from early clamping, and injections of Vitamin K, and/or Hep B, and other vaccinations, and their lot numbers and known ingredients, and the drug companies name who made the vaccination batch.

All this information of risk-factors if agreed to must be by signed informed consent of approval, or written rejection of such known factors for safer options, that were also discussed by facts of literature the mother signed. The consequences of our choices must be facts written down on the child's and mother's medical charts. Such medical records and copies given to the mother and father or Next Friend of the child's, must become standards of policy of written specifically for maternity matters in any proposed Medical Bill of Rights of the medical consumer.

Security of persons and equal protection must be for the uniqueness of the women who bring forth our future resources: babies who must be given full respect and dignity for being human citizens. (Reading suggested, the Ethical Canary . . . by Margaret Somerville, McGill University, Quebec, Canada).

SAFER OPTIONS TO CHEMICAL DRUGS - Red Leaf Raspberry Tea:

The Pioneers used instead of commercial drugs a strong red raspberry leaf tea. This made for an easier control of the contractions, the tea taken just prior to delivery of the child, when labor began.
Raspberry leaves contain tannic and gallic acids both used in the use of tanning leathers, perhaps, for the softening and/or strengthening them.
The following Magical tea strength was provided in the Rodales Encyclopedia of Natural Home Remedies, page 379, who got the secret from a Scotland book, called Dragged to Light by W. H. Box of Plymouth, England, that stated, "On one ounce of raspberry leaves pour one pint of boiling water, cover and let steep for 30 minutes. Strain, and when the time for delivery is approaching drink the whole as hot as possible. " The delivery is said to be very quick after drinking this tea. Some women drink a lighter tea mix, to strengthen their womb "before" pregnancy.

I don't see why the same tea drink wouldn't work for expelling the afterbirth, too. So drugs for induction of labor or for the placenta to be expelled are not necessary, and neither is immediate cord clamping of the child's pulsating lifeline/hopeline.

There is yet another remedy other than taking oxytocin to produce the afterbirth: The Eskimo's stick their fingers down their throat, and they cough and out pops the placenta, naturally.

HOSPITALS GIVE NO DISCLOSURE OF SERIOUS SIDE EFFECTS OF THE DRUGS THEY OFFER THE PREGNANT WOMEN:

The Harm of Artificial Oxytocins/Pitocin. (see list of contents) These said drugs have harmful preservatives in them. While drug stores must tell you side effects of drugs you purchase over the counter, the pharmacies in the hospitals are not under the same requirements, apparently. Nor, the policies of the hospitals, nor of the doctors, nor of the nurses, offering them, and administrating them are responsible for telling the side-effects of any drug they offer a distressed pregnant lady.

Some doctors may assume that duty to inform and educate the pregnant mother is not their duty but to the community's provision for the prenatal classes. The women must pay for that service, costing about $60.00. What I have been informed from those attending those courses is that no serious warnings are told the mothers. In fact they are led to believe accepting drugs during labor is not harmful to them, or their fetus.

They are misled with statements the drugs do not cross the placenta. That is misleading information. The women have no means to read for themselves in Pharmaceuticals put out by the drug companies themselves. I have listed some of the concerns reported under the List of Contents.

Doctors and nurses have been known also to mix and match the drugs. Some doctors are directing inductions of the labor, and they start with out-patience treatments of gels, like Cervadil. Any substance applied to the membranes of the mother's cervic can absorb into cracks of the skin, thus, into the mother's own blood stream, and thus into the child's blood stream. The mother may be allergic to the creams and/or gels, or even the fetus.

Mothers are not informed any drug that is designed to terminate the pregnancy, is an abortion drug and it has potential harm to both her and her baby, if it is a wanted baby.

The quality, of most drugs deteriorate. The caution, then, is any drug's use by any midwife or medical person who may purchase Oxytocins or creams and gels, that are readily available in Mexico.

The concern is most hospitals, only have these drugs (abortion drugs), and the drugs used by others, outside of a hospital setting, may be harmful, or stored incorrectly, and/or if not used within their expiration date, have deteriorated. Mothers must have informed choice to know the quality and the preservatives and not be imposed on to have any drug injected into her body, or applied to her cervic. This is true for a home attended birth, or a hospital birth.

MISREPRESENTATION OF OXYTOCINS:

These Oxytocins, by a variety of names, are often misrepresented by being told to the expecting mother that they are only hormones that are present in the body. But these drugs are not normal hormones but are man's products attempting to mimic nature's. Many have harmful preservatives and trace elements in them. See Oxytocins List of Contents.

These drugs, while they can be given in a variety of ways, they are most commonly injected. Some do induce labor, and some later, at the time the baby's head is born. Some with an excuse they are necessary to allegedly minimize bleeding.

The facts are, if the mother refused drugs before labor, or had no induction, and if the mother does not have hard long labor, caused by the induction of the same drugs, oxytocins/Pitocin, she is going to have a healthy womb, and it will not bleed unnaturally. She may bleed more so, if she is anemic at the time of birth.

The question of injection Oxytocins during labor, after the baby's head is born must be questioned as to motives, as it excused or gave a defense, according to the World Health Organization, the direction of immediate cord clamping, and touching of the woman's body by cord traction. And that was not explained or given to by informed consent on most women victimized by drug treatment or the threat to the child to have immediate cord clamping. Inquiries of the risk taking must be included in an Commission on Inquiry on the treatment of the women and the lack of informed consent.

DECEPTION AND WITHHELD INFORMATION : Why early clamping is done after the use of oxytocins.

The truth is more likely not fear of the mother bleeding, but that the medical persons (midwives and doctors and possibly 9-1-1 medics) cause the contractions to be speeded up, in an otherwise undrugged birth, and trapping the placenta in the womb.

The oxytocins, given routinely during the birth of the child, mostly as the head is being born, the mother is being injected with the Oxytocin. They are now worried to get the placenta out of the womb, before it closes down tightly on the placenta. Then they fear an operation to remove it.

They then start to press down on the mother's stomach, and pull on the now cut cord. A fire drill process is now taking place, and some examples are:

The mother's blood pressure is dropping (oxytocin).
The baby is limp and gasping.
They have two emergencies:
- One, to deal with the mother and the other
- To deal with a blood and oxygen deprived child.

This is active management in a fire drill. It is routine, though, for hospital births.

The baby is being given oxygen and blood transfusions.
Medics work on the child, and the doctor works on trying to revive the mother.
More drugs to stabilize her heart, and they are pulling on her cord, and pressing on her stomach.
The placenta is out, and it is burst.
- More fire drill, more drugs so the mother does not have a severe reaction of her baby and her child's blood mixing.
- After the two bloods mixed, the mother then may have difficulty in conceiving and carrying to full term more children.

Women who have gone through this fire drill are all too familiar how it is routine. What the women may not know the risks they endangered, while the medical persons corrected the situation, as they were created and arose, the problems were avoidable, and they were likely associated with the administering of drugs. The women not having warning for informed choices of safer options.

What the medical services have not provided is alternatives to "active management" that feeds bigger hospital expenses, and more drug costs, all a greater burden to the taxpayer.

The complications do not end there. The problems of bad medical practices and trends are just now beginning. Some of them are:

The mother can develop thyroid problems by side reactions to the drug.
The child is going to look normal, if revived in time, but he/she is now a compromised and impaired child to the degree of early cord clamping and how quickly the child was revived.
The child will have some learning problems, to the degree of oxygen and nourishment depletion.
The added cost will be a burden if the child becomes autistic, or so labelled by the age of 9.
See Table of Contents regarding Autistic children's getting financial compensation. About 4.8 million dollars is estimated to help educate and treat such a child. Others are yet to be compensated, Attention Deficit Disorders, and those children suffering with cancers and their quality of lifes compromised.

Known Oxytocins risks to the mother and/or fetus/infant :

Drop in the heart contractions
Hard and longer muscle contractions, and close together. When used as an induction, the fetus is oxygen deprived, and may be born still born. Not all babies show distress that nurses are asked to check for.
Drugs used in labor inductions are mostly associated with causing a c-section birth as they cause mal-positions. They should never be used on a women with a mal-positioned child.
Drugs are more commonly related to cause distress in the fetus, causing cords around the neck, and leading to c-sections.
Drop in blood pressure.
Headaches to the mother.
Nausea to the mother and, perhaps, this happens to the child, and even in a greater degree.
Fear of complications to the child if oxytocins cross the placenta, during and after birth.
Meconium present in the child's amniotic fluid, perhaps swallowed.
Early cord clamping on an otherwise pulsating umbilical cord, the child is weakened, and may go into shock and may die.
Brain cell damage feared to the infant. It is unknown for sure if impairment of future brain cell or other cell organ development are caused by drugs given the mother during labor.
Allergic reactions to preservatives in the drugs. Therefore, no safe dosage can be known.

See list of contents for other Oxytocin drug risks and also the Reference and Source Materials.

THESE ARE OTHER CONCERNS SHARED OVER THE INTERNET:

There is insecurity of person to the pregnant women as to inadequate provisions for maternity education based in facts of science, and the care and treatment by the Government and Their SelfRegulating Medical Agents, licensed by the College of Physicians and Surgeons.

Failure to Provide All Women with A Plan Providing for Natural Birth Without Drugs A Natural Unassisted Birth, Including Position of Birth and Where to Birth, in Warm Water, If She Prefers.

Threat and Fear to the Woman If She Does Not Trust the System and Does Not Use it, there is implied A FiveYear Jail Sentence. This is for Endangering to A Person.
- Some government welfare persons believed they could pick the child up just for the mother not having a child with a licensed medical person, so the threat was to use the licensed doctors who are not inadequately trained on the facts of the fetus to adult circulation system, and the ambulance medics too.
- This is more of a threat to the woman who births at home and knows to protect the child's lifeline. But she is under threat if she has a midwife who intends to follow early clamping she is now trained to do, and to take blood samples and the placenta back to the hospital. (See Criminal Code of Canada S242).

Fair is Fair to Have 5Year Jail Sentences on Those Who Approved Endangering Medical Policies.
- The doctor and his/her nurse Intended Not to Keep Facts of Records Or LongTerm Studies Until the Child Was At Least 27 Years of Age . . . For the Child to Have Civil Remedies of Unfair and Unnatural Interventions At His/Her Birth.

The Hospitals and Their Approved Medical Servants and Approved Policies of Active Management Are Endangering to Most Babies and Mothers Who Use the Hospitals, Now Or Even in the Past.

As to the Threat of Mothers Going to Jail Or Their Chosen Birth Aids, If the Licensed Medical Persons Were Threatening the Woman with Drugs and Child Impairment by Early Cord Clamping, and Putting Children Down If They Are Under 5Pounds, Why Are They Not Before the Courts?

Pardons in Advance. It has been suggested so many professionals persons are involved in the wrongful participating of harmful treatment to the pregnant women during the childbirth and false teaching in all the medical policies, manuals and directed in the Biology books that Pardons are required in advance. However, pardons requires compensation to Past and Present Victims.

UNINFORMED CONSENT:

This drugging, in many circumstances, are done without the mother knowing the consequences to her and her child. The babies need to be revived, one in sixteen, many jeopardized by 100 percent oxygen, then followed with blood transfusions because of blood deprivation by early cord clamping.

Jail threatened if Mother does not Birth with supervision and this is implied it be with the Government's "licensed" Agents:

In most instances, the mother did not give informed consent to have this so-called "appropriate care" as she was forced to sign a form to be allowed into the hospital to birth her baby, threatened, if she birthed naturally at home, without a licensed doctor (implied), she would go to jail for up to 5-years. No options for unassisted births are provided for in most Western hospitals.
The trusting blindly of the medical persons should mean that trust is deserved and is responsible and accountable.
The fire drill and ritual above are not always written down on both the mother's medical chart and the baby's own medical chart. Particularly, the timing of the clamping of the cord, and the condition of the cord when clamped, and how much blood was drained from the placenta. Nor, where the placenta blood goes and with whose authority or private billing for handling human organs and blood.

DRUGGED BLOOD USED IN RESEARCH AND TRANSPLANTS:

The drained blood or syringed out blood from the placenta is still good to be used in medical research and in cord blood stem cells research. The placenta blood was the wrongfully deprived benefit to the owner/infant, who would least be risked to internal injuries had no clamping on the pulsating umbilical cord happened. Certainly, not with signed informed consent of the endangering to the child by the legal guardians who have a duty to only act in the current best interest of the child, in the known circumstances.

The known empirical facts of science can demonstrate no harm done by unclamped and uncut babies, and that the blood volume and pressure are needed in the child's expanding lungs. Injury to the lungs, heart and brain (Magical Child, brain lesions, see list of contents), and injury to them and other internal organs can be reasonably be perceived by deprivation of 20 to 50 percent total blood volume. The child must have legal protection, equal protection and security of person. See the Canadian Criminal Codes in the List of Contents.

If the drugs are causing the child's blood system to be toxic and the drugs kill cells, that information is not being factually provided by the drug companies providing oxytocins and Pitocin. Nor, is it told to the mother during doctor's visits and prenatal classes, or at the hospital, where the drug is given from their own pharmacies. Nor, did the universal World Health Organization do their duty to put plainly the facts of risk of drugs given the pregnant women during labor and the side-effects on the child.

W.H.O. appeared in their indecisive summaries (1998) to take a neutral position, and that favored more the drug companies, and their financial interests, then it did for the rights of informed consent for the legal guardians of the child to make an informed decision in the best interest of both the mother and the child. Survival and living is not the issue here, it is the fact of no informed consent, and injuries to the living cause life to be more difficult then it ought to have been, if unnecessary interventions had not been imposed on the mother and/or the newborn child. Duty requires informed consent in all medical matters and human experiments, and in taking human blood and organs and tissues from cells.

Infant Brain Cell Development: According to the article in World Book Encyclopedia, Vol B, p. 459, 1979, states until the child is about two years old there are new brain cells developing. But, then, after that age, the brain cells just get bigger, until about to age 17.

As to the warning of early clamping when oxytocin is used, the reasons for early clamping are not clearly made know by World Health Organization's comments, (1998) at the List of Contents . There comments were capitalized on by Dupont. They made the perfect instant clamping and combined cutting tool to get in on this instant clamping when oxytocins are used in a child's birth. It is believed all ambulance medics now carry this kit. Natural birth needs no drugs and no clamps, in most instances.

MEDICAL CRIMINAL ASSAULT IF MOTHER NOT INFORMED OF RISKS:

All this medical procedures, the active management policies, when done without informed consent and choice to say no for better and safer options, like warm water births, are what I call medical assault and battery on both the mother and the child. It is done without choices of safer options, which best are natural birth choices that include no drugs, patience, and no clamping or cutting of the cord, to provide for the child to have opportunity to be a blue-ribbon-baby.

No harm done is the intention of nature for all babies. Some may say, that is the original plan and design of GOD, the Grand Omni Designer, if you have a belief, as I do. But most medicine and science persons have no belief. And from what I have read, ethics are circumstantial, if there is a profit to be gain, and a policy clouds the issue of right and wrong, they have an alibi, so do it. God is more approachable and answers faster, then do the executives of the medical associations, making such policies that doctors attempt to impose on the naive, without true informed consent. What they want is consent on what they have given, with no dissent. They seek compliance, and all too often, women comply without questioning or having taken the time to review and research.

However, these self-regulating associations and Colleges, and their individual members are duty bound to the Charter of Rights and Criminal codes, and Rule of Law. Particularly, when these medical practices were being imposed without informed consent or information provided to be able to reject treatment, or opt for more natural care choices.

C-section babies can be removed as a natural-sealed-unit, so all babies can have full transfusion, too. Parents must know this to have a signed birth plan to protect the c-section babies from being further weakened. The c-section babies are already weakened by the necessary administration of drugs. But the child does not need to have lung problems, too, and other organs caused to be dehydrated by early clamping of the cord.

T. PELTONEN METHOD IS BEST FOR C-SECTION BABIES:

Babies will not have lung problems if the study of T. Peltonen is followed. In 1981, Peltonen proved c-section babies can be removed by what I call a natural-sealed-unit, placenta and baby, together. The baby and his/her placenta must be kept warm, and the baby's own heart will continue the placenta transfusion into his own body, and the placenta, like a natural vaginal birth will be reduced to a small flat cake, which is Greek meaning placenta.

T. Peltonen proved no c-section baby will have the Infant Respiratory Distress Sysdrome (IRDS), otherwise called the Hyaline Membrane Disease. It is characterized by the formation of glassy film over the air sacs of the lungs. Fluids are in the lungs until the blood absorbs that. If early clamping is done to the child, the placenta's oxygenated blood cannot flow into the now expanding lungs, as it should. The lungs are then damaged. But, as Peltonen revealed the lungs are NOT damaged by not clamping the cord. Rather, the c-section baby is removed with the placenta and the baby kept together, as a natural-sealed-unit.

Why was not Peltonen's study revealed to the public's attention and to be approved for the standard of care to all babies, c-section, or normal vaginal birth?

$500 BONUS FOR THE PELTONEN METHOD OF CARE FOR C-SECTION BABIES:

If this sealed-unit is requested and insisted on for any emergency c-section child, and to encourage this method, there is a $500.00 bonus for the mother and child providing a video-tape of this procedure, showing the placenta going down. Others may contribute to the fund, to build on it, for the first request with video will be paid.

If T. Peltonen did a movie it has not been released for the public's attention, and concealed from most of the younger doctors training as obstetricians and gynecologists and surgeons.

OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT COMMISSIONED INQUIRY IS SOUGHT:

Unnecessary interruption of the infant's circulation system, associated with almost all internal injuries and learning problems, to those children it is done to, must come before an official Commission Inquiry. When the truth of what I say, based in known medical research and logical observations, then the Courts may have to follow through with criminal violations to the persons and or organizations with a duty to protect the public. However, they didn't protect them and their policies don't provide for them to look after investigations to find out who is training what, and why or what is best practice possible.

The police then are confused as to investigating medical matters of unconsented to medical practices where there is known harm, not necessary if safer methods were the policy and the choice, regarding maternity matters.

The Coroners, many are not doctors, are also confused when they have a death of a newborn child whether that was criminal medical malpractice in the use of drugs, knowing all drugs cross the placenta and harm babies. And many uneducated Coroners, do not know to check any deceased baby for suffocation by early cord clamping. This is when hasty clamping was done when it was known there would be no provision of blood expanders.

Did they consider the possibility of motive and opinion of the doctor deciding, themselves, outside of known law to provide for the essentials of life for a living baby, but then decided that smaller babies under 5-pounds would be put down by the decision of a doctor. A doctor trained and who believed small babies should not be allowed to live.

If so, the doctors decide, then we would not have had the blessing of the natural and home-birthed Dionne quintuplets, born near Callander, Ont., Canada, in 1934. They were the first quintuplets, each under 5-pounds, known to live for more than a few hours after birth. A few of them, yet living to this day.

In the event of small babies being put down by the early clamping of the cord with no intentions of proper giving of blood expanders, were the parents informed of the risk, during active management policies? In most situations, no, they are not so educated.

There may, then, be required the necessary civil compensation to victims now living, or to the parents who had a child die a wrongful death, by unconsented to, euthanasia, the killing of their baby by suffocation and deprivation of essential to live, oxygenated and nutritious blood, by the unnecessary practice now routine, hasty umbilical cord clamping. This is not yet approved by the Criminal Code to sanction killing babies under 5-pounds. Can the medical persons disregard the law, and should not Rule of Law apply to all, including medical persons now doing this?

WHEN THERE ARE SOCIAL ISSUES THAT CANNOT BE RESOLVED BY LOGIC AND COMMON SENSE AND A DEBATE OF EDUCATIONAL AND MEDICAL/SCIENCE PROFESSIONALS WANTING TO IMPOSE POLICIES ON THE COMMON FOLK, THE COURTS CAN BE APPLIED TO HEAR ALL SIDES AND MAKE THE ARBITRARY DECISION ON FACTS OF EVIDENCE OR THE LACK OF IT. OUR SOCIETY MUST STAND BY FACTS OF BEST PRACTICE POSSIBLE AND BEST TEACHING IS MADE FACTUALLY KNOWN FOR THE PUBLIC'S BEST INTEREST:

It would be up to the Courts to decide if the medical trainers and/or their medical associations and Colleges and/or Faculties of Medicine are responsible for any false training, now in the public paid for school textbooks, used in the teaching of Biology, and in the use of the training of the present and future medical persons.

Perhaps, in the past, no one was watching as well as we ought to have been, or things crept into the system slowly, and we lost touch with our roots and customs of the past. However, when the matter is raised by access to the Internet, where one can communicate across the world and we can find out shared concerns, we must question the continuation and motives for the setting of false medical science and medical practices. They do not come about and without organization and agreement.

There are criminal laws and civil duties that deal with concealing and/or obstruction of justice when a child has been put wrongfully down, by size, or by sex, or by social position of the parents in the community, and to the added burdens placed on society for needlessly impaired and compromised children when born in institutions not prepared in the patience of care for providing best practice possible, and least risk of harm, and the highest standards and ethics of those providing the services. We must use the Courts to find out the answers to concerns.

Again, by the blood trapped in the placenta, then the medical fields using the blood deprived the child as though it were extra or waste blood. That is exploiting of the women to have a baby, and to exploit the baby for its stem cell components in the blood, being enzymes, hormones, albumin, plasma, white cells, mature cells, platelets, and so forth.

What they were doing with the deprived blood, whether burned or sent to research or extraction to be put into the blood supply, was done, in most cases, even approved by hospital boards, without informed consent of the legal guardian(s). In most cases the father of the child's consent is not even considered important. When if informed he may take an action of prevention, using the Courts, if necessary.

Cord Stem Cell Blood Banks: How did they get their units of blood. Mostly by parental donation, but that was, I believe, given with not genuine informed consent. What parent would not provide, first, for his own child's needs, allowing the natural pulsation in the cord to cease. What blood is left, is hardly going to fill a tablespoon, and is not wanted by stem cell blood banks. So the idea is to encourage early cord clamping, leaving the parents with a "living" child, not necessary the blue-ribbon-baby, they planned for.

Parents were told the blood was going to be discarded, anyway by the hospital, so why not store it for possible needs of the child. That is deception because they did not tell them no clamping or cutting the cord is necessary at all. Both hospitals and private cord stem cell blood banks have "conned" the public. We are paying dearly for injured children, almost, an epidemic for learning disabled children, and many increases in brain tumors in children and a variety of cancers. Children cannot learn as easily when impaired at birth, and 65 percent of the Ontario children, when tested, failed their standard exams.

There, in that Province, they have two private cord stem cell blood banks. The children are now of the age that learning problems, of all those babies early clamped, are showing learning disorders. All new doctors trained in that Province have been confirmed to be taught "only" in immediate cord clamping. They are unapproachable when I have spoken, to at least one of these Graduates, and he said he would not stop, unless required to do so.

I do not know if he sent the trapped blood back to the Ontario banks, for any compensation in collection blood samples. But I do know many doctors would be tempted to raise any extra cash to pay off $50,000 in student loans. If one child, a large baby, was deprived 200 ccs of placenta blood, drained from the cord (that is why it is called "cord" blood), and that is sent by 30 ccs to a variety of blood banks, that can fetch $250 USA dollars per each 30 ccs sent in.

That can be an extra $1,000 USA dollars for quality stem cell collections. Such records are all traceable if the police were to do investigations on these damaged children and the parents came forward, identifying the doctors trained in unethical manner of raising money, for themselves, and no regard or respect to the child's rights for equal protection and security of person.

Parents who had 180 ccs of placenta blood collected or less, and paid to store them a Stem cell blood banks have been deceived in that they only have part of the child's blood coming back, stem cells, if their child got sick. One baby did require his blood back, that was store at birth. They baby was dying of leukemia. He was as white as a ghost when shown on the Peter Mansbridge News.

The story was to encourage other parents to donate their baby's placenta blood by early cord clamping. There was insufficient information to warn the public of the dangers or the right of the baby to have security of person at birth, when the placenta transfuses the baby's blood for his needs of immediate growth at that time and for the lungs needs for that blood supply, without taking it from other organs.

The parents do not think to ask what happened to all of the components of their child's blood that are extracted from the placenta blood.

That part of their contract was not fairly discussed. That is deemed waste and taken as salvage blood most likely and separated into the components, and sold back to those wanting platelets, plasma, white cells, and so forth. Actual amount of the blood in stem cells, is about 1/2 of every mature red blood cell.

They paid only for storing stem cells. To my knowledge, the parents did not give informed consent, consent for a choice to either burn the blood or store the other components of blood too. To have used the blood elsewhere, means the blood bank had a conflict of interest what they did with the other components of blood.

Or, how they profited from the other components of blood extracted. That is breach of fiduciary trust, if unconsented components of blood went to components of blood, used in research or blood products, like platelets, white cells, and so forth, too.

Such confirmation of what blood is burned or used elsewhere may be by calling the Cord Blood banks in Alberta, at the U of A, LifeBank in Vancouver BC, and the two blood banks in Ontario, and anywhere in the World.

The cord stem cell blood banks are the biggest trend in medical science. I fear for the welfare of the babies born today. The government(s) world wide have not protected the babies, nor the parents. Long term disabilities and billions in the medical costs and in school costs will be our fate. We are seeing that now.

The faster we get to providing with proper education of the youth, they can reverse the trend and being, again, to have healthy blue-ribbon-babies, by knowing Nature is Best, and we best seek it out and protect our natural resources. Best to start immediately.

Encouragement is for Blue-Ribbon-Baby-Birth Centers, International, to be started in every community, to start a tradition of mother to mother teaching how to have healthy babies, or grandmother to the younger generations. Why this is necessary:

We are moving past the third generation of uninformed women on the facts of child birth process, particularly, the drugging of mothers during labor, followed by early umbilical cord clamping on her baby. That unnecessary clamping, then cutting is only done for cosmetic reasons. The process is unfairly interrupting the infant's circulation system and to some children this can cause internal damages, subtle, to serious, to even death. I call these: disease, disorder, distress, and death, the 4 D's.

These internal organic disorders by oxygenated blood and nutrient deprivation, may not reveal damages to the child, for months, or years later. All such information of the treatment to the child's umbilical cord at birth, the time of clamping and the condition of the cord, are NOT factually recorded on the child's own medical charts. Why is that? There is then no paper record to compare injuries to children by drugs and timing of the clamping of the cord and blood amount deprived.

See List of Contents for the need to have a public's best interest for a Order in Council Commission of Inquiry on Maternity Matters. See also Conflict of Interests, list of contents.

THE BLUE-RIBBON-BABY-BIRTH-CENTERS SOCIETY

If there is interest, donations would be appreciated to assist with developing Blue-Ribbon-Baby-Birth-Centers in each community. Organization is necessary to promote best practice possible, with libraries, and birth videos, and educational information and to provide informed speakers to the future parents.

Mothers-to-be must be supported with factual information and birth centers that will allow unassisted natural births, which can be in warm water, followed by no clamping off the umbilical cord if the mother wants no risk of blood infections or hernias in her baby.

This organization for factual information is necessary to counteract false information in Biology books and present information in Health textbooks, and Books on life, and even some Encyclopedias that are directing immediate cord clamping, false birth positions (on the back and semi-sitting), and drugging the mother with drugs that cross the placenta, and can change the baby's blood and cause brain cell damages.

It is my goal to have this an International Organization in the same way medical associations are organized, and had a duty to protect the public, but on birth matters remained silent. Expert directives were being allowed to have babies immediate cord clamped. None of the medical associations or the Colleges, all with a duty to protect the public, stood against false policies set by the Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada and in the United States, and likely in other Nations.

The direction knowingly was depriving the babies of their ownership of blood from up to 50 percent of their nutrients and stem cells. This was a violation of the duty of care to the child to have equal protection and security of person. The child being of mental and physical disadvantaged not able to defend itself. This blood was knowingly trapped in the placenta, and witnessed and often drained by others in the hospital, or in other labs if the whole placenta and contents were picked up.

Most placentas are placed in a red environmental bag and put in a cooler and later picked up by a private organization, the nurses not knowing where they go, for sure, or where or how discarded, or if they are sent to research or for extraction of components of tissues for future transplants. In BC, they are alleged sent over to the States. Why?

I am looking for active and inactive members. Active would be to work in your own community. Inactive members contribute as they can, or are members at large of the Original head office of Blue-ribbon-Baby-Birth-Centers. Please consider a donation to be a Charter Member, of $25.00 USA.

We hope to have representative give out information and speak to students who plan to be parents in the future.

Donna Young

Box 504

Dawson Creek, BC

V1G 4H4

Canada

tel/fax: 250-782-9223

Search this www.lotusbirth.com web site for : AAP policy, SOGC policy, ACOG policy; Placenta; Fetus to Neonate Circulation; 30-second clamping; World Health Organization and Dupont ; Circumcision ; Dr. Sarah Buckley's Declaration ; pH receptors ; Lotusbirth References ; Canadian Criminal Codes and when a baby is a person; Laying of Information ; Mandamus ; and any other subject you may be interested in. Search Lotusbirth www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/102580814

(Protect Babies http://www.123-baby-birth.com) Search at Google at this web site for the " No Policies " for equal protection to babies from the various government officials who appoint representatives to protect the public on medical policies and practices; also the "No policies" of the various medical associations, societies, and colleges did not live up to no form of discrimination to women or the child of any kind. It is believed the all Hospital Acts, all Professional Acts, all medical associations were formed and have licensed members for the specific duty to for equal protection and security of person, regardless of: age, mental or physical disadvantages ; race, color, social or marital status of the pregnant lady ; or belief or faith of the family, or genetic type of blood sought for by medical researchers, for stem cell matching, and use of white cells, mature red cells, platelets, enzymes, hormones, and plasma.

____________________

Note: PETITION www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/102580814

Please ask this site to have a Medical Alert Petition Site: petitions@earth.case2.com

contact: Donna Young, Mother and Grandmother Donations gratefully accepted. My costs are $231.00 for the active management of my web server. If you would like to help off set costs and patronize by continued research, by allowing me to provide web space, for your own business or interests, please contact me.

Home: www.lotusbirth.com

References of research: www.lotusbirth.com/doc/FEB2003Lotusbirth-110.htm

This url: www.lotusbirth.com/doc/FEB2003Lotusbirth-0.htm

A medical web site to visit:

www.cordclamping.com