General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDeadly Delays (or, where baby-lovers should be spending their time and attention ...
... rather than forcing women to have birth who don't want to, aren't ready, or have a problem pregnancy)
http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/watchdogreports/Deadly-Delays-Watchdog-Report-Delays-at-hospitals-across-the-country-undermine-newborn-screening-programs-putting-babies-at-risk-of-disability-and-death-228832111.html
The baby in Arkansas seems healthy at birth. Warm, fuzzy skin. A normal weight. But Aiden Cooper can't keep down formula.
Don't worry, he's fine, doctors assure his mother as they leave the hospital. You're just a first-time mom.
Aiden goes home and sleeps in a bassinet beside his mother's bed. Soon his stomach becomes swollen, bulging with veins. He breaks out in a rash. He is limp, pale, won't eat.
In North Carolina, a baby is born with chubby cheeks and the same button-nose as his big brother. At 11 days old, Garrett Saine turns gray, stops breathing, then turns blue.
Blood pours from the nose and mouth of a newborn boy in Wisconsin. A baby girl in Indiana has seizures, then quits breathing.
In each instance, doctors frantically try to figure out why the baby is so sick. Routine blood samples taken shortly after birth have the answers. But the samples haven't been tested.
They should have been sent to a lab within 24 hours to be screened for disorders that can often be treated if caught early. But they weren't. Instead, samples sit at hospitals for a few days. A week. Some samples are lost.
Nearly every baby born in the United States has blood collected within a day or two of birth to be screened for dozens of genetic disorders. The entire premise of newborn screening is to detect disorders quickly so babies can be treated early, averting death and preventing or limiting brain damage, disability and a lifetime of costly medical care.
Yet one of newborn screening's most important metrics speed is ignored for tens of thousands of babies' tests each year, a Milwaukee Journal Sentinel analysis of nearly 3 million screening tests shows.
In Arkansas, it took 3½ weeks for Aiden's blood sample to be tested. Infection raged through his tiny body as he lay in neonatal intensive care in Little Rock.
<snip> ... the entire article is well worth reading.
Especially if you are planning to give birth to a child soon, anywhere in the United States.
Some people think that "babies" are only "murdered" by abortion ... but babies are killed by failures in the system that could be easily addressed.
I want to know when the so-called "pro-life" people will start protesting the incompetence at these hospitals that kills and injures actual babies, and leaves families devastated and with huge medical bills and possibly a brain-damaged child to support for life.
malaise
(268,930 posts)It's Jebus' will. Life is very simple for these morons.
MH1
(17,600 posts)Those ought to answer why these babies don't matter as much as embryos and fetuses.
Ms. Toad
(34,062 posts)that they don't, which turns it into a "when did you stop beating your mother" question.
The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,674 posts)U.S.A.! U.S.A.! We're number one!
Oh, wait....
MH1
(17,600 posts)or something like that.
We damn sure aren't #1 in a good way on that statistic.
The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,674 posts)We could have the best health care in the world, but we have chosen not to do what that would take. Because, freedom. Or something like that.
MH1
(17,600 posts)We certainly had the resources to do it (at one time anyway) but chose to distribute those resources differently.
el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)This should be looked at more though - I wonder if there is a common denominator among hospitals who aren't doing the testing appropriately - is this a victim of funding slow downs or what?
Another issue is that the Republicans determination to stop all funding for family planning organizations also hurts on a lot of these issues as well.
Bryant