My son/daughter were born in Guatemala and their length was in cm but weight in pounds. >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 04/29/01 06:52pm >>> When my two sons were born at Kaiser Permanente Hospital in San Francisco in 1984 and 1986, they were officially registered as 3690 g and 4390 g respectively. The State of California shows grams only on the birth certificates. I think what happens is that the hospital does the official figure in grams then shows it as pounds/ounces for the benefit of the mommies. Oddly enough, though, when the same two sons get measured at Kaiser here in Gaithersburg, notations are done in inches and pounds only -- though the scales and measuring devices are all dual. I don't know what is going on here. Carleton In a message dated 2001-04-29 07:49:13 Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Dear Carleton, and All, > > There is the same conservatism with babies birth masses in Australia. My > opinion is that this conservatism is due to the need of new mothers to > compare the mass of their new babies with the mass of their mother*��s and > grandmother*��s babies *�� herself included. > > In my opinion birthing suites in hospitals should be encouraged to convert > the new grandmother*��s (and great grandmother*��s baby birth masses to > kilograms. > > One argument that you might use to support your views on this is that is in > the clear interest of the new baby that everyone associated with it knows > its mass in kilograms in case a strange nurse needs to treat it with a mass > sensitive treatment. Does the new mother or the new grandmother really want > a treatment (specified in milligrams of treatment per kilogram of baby) > applied to her new 7 lbs. 11 1/4 ozs grandchild by a young nurse who has > had no school experience or training in old units? > -- > > Cheers, > > Pat Naughtin >
