AIBU to expect the NHS to protect your baby from GBS

[kimpoulton]

Protect your baby from group b strep infection.

My 4th baby was stillborn at full term plus 9 days after a perfect, healthy, textbook pregnancy. I later found out I had group b strep. Had I known I had this I would have received antibiotics in labour to protect my baby.

I dont think it's unreasonable to expect the NHS at an antenatal appointment to inform me of the biggest infection in newborn babies. Over 400 babies per year are affected by GBS, one baby a week dies from GBS and many who survive are left with life long disabilities.

Please read and sign my petition.

Make sure you ask your midwife about GBS.

You can pay £34 for a home testing kit and the charity group b strep support website lists where you can order a test kit from.

www.change.org/p/groupbstrep

[kshaw]

My best friend has just finished her PhD on strep b and asked me to ask midwife - was told test isn't reliable enough for nhs to fund it. Thank you for the link I will definitely be doing it!

[uberalice]

OP, I'm so sorry this happened to you. This could easily have happened to me too. I had GBS when I went into labour the first time and it was only discovered by chance. Hospital took a swab because I thought I had thrush. I dread to think what would have happened if I'd not mentioned it. I've signed the petition.

[Foldedtshirt]

Thank you.

[RebeccaMumsnet]

Hi all,

Apologies. We have undeleted the OP and moved this to petitions now.

[ChasedByBees]

This seems a really harsh deletion.

[Foldedtshirt]

Blimey. Bad call MNHQ- you could at least have moved it petitions. Did you really just delete without letting the OP know!?

[EstelleRoberts]

I've seen loads of posts with links to petitions in, though, Stratters (including guest posts, I think?). And I don't recall seeing them be deleted. Hence the bafflement.....

Unless it's a (very) new rule?

[Graphista]

Apologies I thought by doing separate posts it would be clear that I did not mean YOU had said it was a cost reason Coldfeet.

A few posters did question/suggest it may be a factor.

However

"It's emotive and everybody's worst nightmare. Other countries have bowed to that. In this country screening is organised so that decisions about introducing programmes are based on all research available. It does include cost but in this case it's the lack of outcomes vs over treatment."

Rather sounds a little patronising? As if those countries have introduced screening and treatment for purely emotive/political reasons, as they too won't have read, considered even conducted their own research?

"Countries which we understand offer sensitive tests for GBS to women during pregnancy include: Australia, Argentina, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Czech Republic, Dubai, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Hungary, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Lithuania, New Zealand, Norway, Oman, Poland, Spain, Slovenia, Switzerland, Taiwan and the USA."

Hardly countries behind scientifically. Nor in some cases particularly wealthy countries. U.K. Isn't always right.

[StStrattersOfMN]

Petition in it?

[EstelleRoberts]

How did it break them, Lou?

Not trying to be arsey, it's just I can't recall anything I would have thought was a problem in the OP. So a bit concerned I could inadvertently fall foul of them too.

[LouMumsnet]

Thanks for all your posts regarding this thread. We really do appreciate your concern. Unfortunately, the OP's post broke our talk guidelines, which was why we had to - reluctantly - take it down.

[ColdFeetinWinter]

Graphista you mention the cost as if I'd said it was a cost issue. I said it wasn't. It's about the outcomes. Screening cannot target individuals who would benefit enough so you'd have blanket treatment of 25,000 to save one baby. The consequence of antibiotics in 25,000 women have not been researched enough. drugs cannot be given without knowing they are needed I.e. A risk vs benefit decision.

Regarding other countries: there is a significant pressure to introduce this. It's emotive and everybody's worse nightmare. Other countries have bowed to that. In this country screening is organised so that decisions about introducing programmes are based on all research available. It does include cost but in this case it's the lack of outcomes vs over treatment. You're not talking a few extra women being treated - it's huge numbers.

[Graphista]

So petitions are allowed?

[Soubriquet]

Plus they have their own petition section so could have easily been moved

[giraffessay]

www.rcog.org.uk/en/patients/patient-leaflets/group-b-streptococcus-gbs-infection-in-newborn-babies/

[Graphista]

How bizarre are petitions not allowed? Sure I've seen others on mn?

[AyeAmarok]

Because of the petition? HQ could you not have just edited that bit?

I'm so sorry for your loss OP.

[Crunchymum]

Why on Earth has this been deleted? Or semi deleted?

[Soubriquet]

What happened to the OP?

Why has it gone?

[ScarletOverkill]

Why have you deleted the op and not the whole thread MNHQ?

[PossumInAPearTree]

The argument I've always heard is that It's a transient infection. So when do you test? If you test at 37 weeks and get a negative how do you know it's still negative at 39/40 weeks? Or you get a positive then maybe the infection would have gone by the time labour starts but you needlessly then get iv abx in labour.

However I think most women would rather take the risk of possibly needless antibiotics. And even though you wouldn't pick up every infection you'd surely pick up a lot?

I think the actual reasons are cost related.

[Graphista]

Also if it's a monetary thing, how much does it cost to deal with the after effects of the infection?

I can't imagine it's low cost to

have mothers in long term counselling and treatment for the effects on them emotionally, possibly not working therefore needing financial support and paying less taxes.

Treat physical possibly long term effects on the mother

Or for providing the treatments and support for babies who've survived but are now disabled. And the families, again possibly resulting in loss of a parent from the workforce.

Maybe not as cost cutting as you might think.

[Graphista]

Coldfeet if it's such a bad idea/decision why do so many other countries do it?

[Tootsiepops]

And here are the arguments for testing. In the interests of balance.

gbss.org.uk/information-and-support/about-gbs/what-is-gbs/faqs/

[ColdFeetinWinter]

The estimate is that you would have to treat 25000 women to prevent one baby dying from GBS. That's 25000 labours with a woman attached to a IV antibiotic drip. The consequence of mass antibiotic treatment is unresearched however with what we know about antibiotics losing their efficacy you'd be trading one tragedy with the inevitability that very sick children and babies cannot be treated with antibiotics in the future.

Medicine isn't clear cut and it's hard to accept scenarios as this

I still feel acutely aware for you OP that this was your baby, your loss and that matters.