Baby Hears

Jonathan hears his mom with the help of a cochlear implant. If this doesn't make you smile, then you need to check whether your heart has been replaced with a lump of coal.

Ultrasounds & Abortion

Oklahoma's recently passed restrictive anti-abortion laws may backfire, at least in part. One of the laws requires that women be forced to look at an ultrasound and hear a lengthy description of the fetus. The idea is that women will be shamed out of having the abortion. In Alabama, where women are given the option of viewing the ultrasound (admittedly, not directly comparable), there has been no decrease in abortions.

In fact, anecdotal evidence suggests that such an approach backfires, particularly for younger embryos and fetuses. Embryos do not look like humans, and that can be reassuring when deciding to terminate. Opponents of ultrasound requirements worry that it will emotionally scar women without actually changing their minds, but data from England suggests that's not the case. Seventy-three percent of women in those studies looked at the ultrasound when given the option, 84% of those said it did not make the decision more difficult, and no one changed her mind about having it done.

It is the second law that I actually find more disturbing. This law prevents a woman from suing a doctor who intentionally hid information about birth defects while the baby was in utero. There are many non-abortion related reasons to know about birth defects before a baby arrives. (As a reminder, Sarah Palin had prenatal tests to confirm a disability in her child.) Even without that fact, I am appalled by legislators making it legally acceptable for a doctor to lie and mislead a patient about anything. That's how you end up with situations like the Tuskegee Experiment.

Female Circumcision

The American Academy of Pediatrics is apparently reversing its earlier recommendation that doctors be allowed to perform "ritual nicks" to prevent families from sending their daughters overseas for full circumcisions.

Female Circumcision

The American Academy of Pediatrics is suggesting that the current U.S. laws regarding female circumcision/genital mutilation be revised so that doctors can perform a ceremonial "nick" on the clitoris. This nick will not have long-term consequences for the child and will hopefully prevent families for sending their daughters overseas to get a much more dangerous and severe circumcision. Some groups are decrying this move, saying that it legitimizes the practice. If it really is a teeny tiny nick that has no long-term issues, then it seems like a good compromise. It's still a weird procedure/ritual, but there are lots of weird things that people do. If they don't harm the child, then I don't generally have a problem with it. For example, I think it's weird to get an infant's ears pierced, but I don't think it should be outlawed.

Advocate for Care

More evidence that as a patient, you have to tirelessly advocate for your care. The Times has done an expose on radiation errors. A theme throughout the piece is that someone failed to test the equipment after programming it. As a result, a man's entire head (including his brain stem) was radiated repeatedly. A woman had a hole burned into her chest, and the hole would not heal. Radiation has obviously saved a lot of lives, so mistakes shouldn't scare people away. Just hold your health team accountable and make them convince you that they have the appropriate safety measures in place.

Liar, liar, pants on fire

Some dillweed anesthesiologist who was a prolific researcher in postoperative pain management has been revealed as a fraud. He made up data for at least 21 articles written over the past decade, some of which underlie a common practice of giving patients aspirin-like medications, rather than narcotics after surgery. If you suck as a researcher, find something else to be good at, don't make up data that affects people's lives.