37 ms·
I went to the hospital to give birth and tested positive for meth
- projectramo 10y agoWas it the inhaler? Was it just a screw up? I wish they would tell us what caused the mix up.
- kdamken 10y agoRight? What a weirdly unsatisfying ending. Did they sue the hospital for not knowing enough about medicine that her inhaler could cause this?
- jckelley 10y agoI know nothing about medical law, but I hope they can do something like this. They essentially treated her like a criminal and clearly caused a lot of emotional damage.
- rconti 10y agoTrue, but they didn't do anything to her. They ADVISED her not to breastfeed, and noted when she went AMA (against medical advice), but let her do so. Arguably, the only thing they did without consent was drug test the child, but I bet they consented. She consented to her own drug tests. All of them.
- mfoy_ 10y agoThat's the point exactly. What a weirdly unsatisfying ending. All this emotional trauma over a false positive. It also really underscores an extremely critical question with society: When the system is inflexible, and uncaring, what recourse do you have when it fails you? Imagine the hopelessness, the bleak future, of the world turning its back on you because of a mistake. I can only imagine this is what it's like to be falsely convicted of a crime... or failing a drug test that you shouldn't have failed. I think there's even a lesson for us technical folks here: When the systems we design are too automated, and too rigid, we are removing all compassion. Now if the system is "perfect" there's no problem, but even Google hasn't been able to completely perfect their systems. People still become the victim of false DMCA takedowns, etc. I guess at the end of the day, the moral is to "Remember the person."
- maxerickson 10y agoHere's the thing, it isn't just automated systems. Large institutions do the same thing. People have less and less of the full picture and act more and more as a component of the system. In this case it appears that the social worker had enough of the full picture to inject some measure of sanity, but I really wonder if the nurses understood the statistics related to the tests well enough to treat her like shit over them.
- hellogoodbyeeee 10y agoWhy would they sue? There was no damage done.
- yarrel 10y agoYou're joking.
- hellogoodbyeeee 10y agoNo I'm not. Honestly I'm astonished that people are calling for a lawsuit. What happened? Some nurses gave her a disapproving look? Someone made an appointment with cps that was later cancelled? So what? I'd be more sympathetic if CPS actually took the child away, but they didn't. The hospital clearly acted unprofessionally, but that is hardly grounds for a lawsuit.
- biomcgary 10y ago1. High levels of cortisol (stress hormone) are known to affect development. 2. Mother-child bonding is facilitated by the oxytocin rush at delivery and was probably disrupted by the aggressive response of the "care" providers. 3. A cascade of hormonal shifts at delivery probably make women much more susceptible to emotional stressors. 4. Care providers that cannot do math (e.g., understand a false positive rate or mg per kg of a drug) should be held liable so that the system can correct. 5. Class action lawsuits are often successful with much less clarity of harm.
- slededit 10y agoThey were going to prevent her from breastfeeding.
- khedoros 10y agoAre you making an argument that distress and psychological harm aren't a form of "damage"? They added some fairly traumatic experiences to an already stressful time in these peoples' lives without sufficient cause. You're trying to say that the little things (glances, the temporary threat of CPS taking away the newborn, being told more than once not to breastfeed your child, being described as a "combative patient" just for doing what's best for the child) don't add up to a big thing. I don't think you understand the stresses involved in this situation. Maybe a lawsuit is going too far, especially if this incident isn't in some permanent CPS record. But if it is, the hospital has them set up for some serious problems down the road.
- chongli 10y agoThis story is from real life, not Hollywood. Unsatisfying, frustrating, and horrifically unjust outcomes are common in real life.
- serge2k 10y ago> Did they sue the hospital for not knowing enough about medicine that her inhaler could cause this murica!! You know what else causes a positive test? Using meth. They got a positive, they followed up with further testing to clarify.
- DiabloD3 10y agoYes, because that would actually be fucking useful. I almost want to flag this post off the front page due to how goddamned useless that article is. And the thing is? It's actually pretty decently written. It was engaging enough to finish reading it. Or rather, not finish reading it: there is at least two paragraphs left that have not been published. Was it a lab fuckup? The inhaler (which also indicates a lab fuckup, since they should have looked at her medical records to deal with known false positives)? Is she going to sue for mental distress, malpractice, whatever? What the hell. Edit: Oh, and like half the HN community are asthmatics and are on inhalers. Can one of us be whisked off by the government for lab fuckups? Can this go on our permanent record due to their incompetence? And as for that woman, can she get this expunged off her record? Once you're tagged by CPS, unless you deal with them with a firm hand, they love to fuck up children's lives. Disclaimer: I grew up in Maine, I've seen repeatedly what CPS has done to families due to their incompetence, I have no reason to think that CPS in other states are any better. If you're a parent, and you care about your child, treat the CPS like a terrorist threat. Do not talk to them unless you're with your lawyer, do not answer their questions, and teach your child the same. Their job is to make you guilty to justify their budget, not protect children.
- projectramo 10y agoI think it was the inhaler. Google reveals it can cause a mix up. I added the link on the root level.
- mfoy_ 10y agoYour issue with the article is half the point of the article. All that emotional trauma with a hurried apology and no explanation. The point is that when "the system" is too uncaring, these are the kinds of consequences. A false positive from a mediocre field test caused this woman no end of grief. The takeaway is that when we, as engineers, design systems, we have to remember edge cases like these, we need to remember the person. When your automated spam detection system flags an account, are you going to outright lock/delete it with extreme prejudice, or are you going to allow the account owner some recourse, and a chance to explain themselves to a real human? I think this article highlights some huge problems with systems that have too much confidence in their tests / checks. Definitely a useful story for all of us to know.
- sickbeard 10y agoThe hospital test was not that accurate. A more accurate test took 2 weeks, came back negative. It's most likely the inhaler but how is she supposed to know exactly what caused the hospital tests to fail? She's not a technician.
- serge2k 10y agoThey should have had the social worker come and explain things to her (false positives happen, the send away test is far more accurate, we aren't going to come and take your baby)
- JshWright 10y ago"Accurate" is too broad a term. The hospital test was likely very accurate, it was just optimized for sensitivity (being sure to catch it if it's there, at the expense of false positives), rather than specificity (being able to have a high degree of confidence that a positive test is true, at the expense of a higher false negative rate). It is _very_ common in medicine to use a very sensitive test to screen for conditions, and then cross check any positives with a more specific test (which is what should have been done in this case, prior to taking any action).
- projectramo 10y agoIt was (likely) the inhaler! It can cause a positive meth test (thank you Google): https://www.labcorp.com/wps/portal/!ut/p/c1/04_SB8K8xLLM9MSSzPy8xBz9CP0os_hACzO_QCM_IwMLo1ALAyNj1yBnQxNfA4MQU6B8JG55d2MCuv088nNT9QtyI8oB5fb_Fw!!/dl2/d1/L0lDU0lKSWdrbUEhIS9JRFJBQUlpQ2dBek15cXchL1lCSkoxTkExTkk1MC01RncvN19VRTRTMUk5MzA4OVMxMDJKR00xTTJOMkRNMC9JX19fXzE!/?WCM_PORTLET=PC_7_UE4S1I93089S102JGM1M2N2DM0_WCM&WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/wps/wcm/connect/LabCorp%20Content/labcorp/services/drug+testing+services/faq/toxicology+faq https://www.labcorp.com/wps/portal/!ut/p/c1/04_SB8K8xLLM9MSS...
- projectramo 10y agoHere is the relevant piece: Q: What do the percentages mean in methamphetamine "d" and "l" isomer test results? A: In order to help determine whether a methamphetamine positive may be due to an illicit source, it is helpful to determine the percentage of "d" isomer. For example, following an individual's use of Vick's Vapor Inhaler, the expected result would be 100% "l" methamphetamine. However, there is a possibility that trace amounts of "d" isomer may be present in the quantitative analysis. Laboratory guidelines have been established to allow for trace presence of the "d" isomer. If the laboratory report indicates more than 80% "l" methamphetamine, the results are consistent with Vick's Vapor Inhaler use. If the laboratory reports more than 20% "d" methamphetamine present, the result indicates the use of "d" methamphetamine other than the inhaler. Illegally produced methamphetamine and amphetamine may contain mixtures of "d" and "l" isomers. LabCorp recommends use of a medical review officer (MRO) to review all non-negative test results.1
- maxerickson 10y agoThat's not informative. That's an OTC nasal decongestant. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levomethamphetamine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levomethamphetamine She was using an albuterol inhaler. It's prescription only and operates on the lung passages. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salbutamol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salbutamol
- projectramo 10y ago
- steve19 10y agoI visit my sister at work sometimes, a nurse who looks after drug addled premature babies at a big hospital... it is heart wrenching to see those little people hooked up to morphine lines because they were born addicts to useless parents. I am sorry she went through that, it is very unfortunate that statistically some tests will come back with false positives. Arguing that they should have treated her different is much like arguing babies should not to be vaccinated because there is a very slight statistical chance they might have a bad reaction.
- toomuchtodo 10y agoI downvoted you because not everyone who is an addict is useless, no more than someone who is going through any other mental illness is useless.
- Chris2048 10y agoOP says "useless parents".
- toomuchtodo 10y agoRight. No more useless than workaholic, absentee parents, or parents with depression. There are no useless parents, only parents who need help.
- jamespo 10y agoThey're useless if they refuse help
- toomuchtodo 10y agoI don't disagree. Would you tell a disabled parent they're useless? One with MS? Or one with cystic fibrosis? Probably not. Mental illness is no different. Whether you want to parent, and how much you're able to parent, are completely different states.
- unwind 10y agoThe title needs editing, the fancy ellipsis of the original has been eaten. Mods, please? My eeeeyeeees ...
- LeifCarrotson 10y agoThat's not a "fancy ellipsis", that's an ordinary, standard U+2026 horizontal ellipsis. It is not three period characters in a row. HN appears to support Unicode://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9105273
- unwind 10y agoYes, I know, that was what I meant and tried to express in a semi-funny way. I fully realize that the ellipsis is a code point/glyph/character/whatever in its own right, and that the rendering of it using three periods is not correct. The existance of that rendering is what makes the proper one seem "fancy", from some points of view. Also, one should never explain jokes I guess.
- sickbeard 10y agoWhat's so scary about CPS? She should have called her doctor/gyna and prepared to lawyer up, especially if she knew she didn't do drugs. Being treated like crap after birth tho must have been tough.
- reefoctopus 10y agoWhat's so scary about CPS? Lawyers are expensive, and dealing with government bureaucracy tends to be time consuming and frustrating.
- CaptSpify 10y agoImagine just having birth, and having someone threaten to take your newborn away. Even if it's a silly threat, that has to be pretty terrifying.
- 97s 10y agoIf you have a kid its one of the most terrifying things on the planet. I am a father and I can't even imagine a mom with all those hormones going and someone saying that to her.
- pigpaws 10y agoCPS has basically unlimited power to take the kid for any contrived reason they can imagine BEFORE it goes through any kind of court... all based on their perceived notion of 'what's best' for the child. And if you don't believe in raising your kid the same way THEY want you to, watch out... http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/04/13/parents-investigated-letting-children-walk-alone/25700823/ http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/04/13/parents... http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/06/14/florida-parents-charged-felony-neglect-after-11-year-old-son-plays-backyard-90-minutes http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/06/14/florida-parents-charge...
- sickbeard 10y agoIt wasn't CPS that took their kids away. It was the police who took them away and handed them to CPS.
- masklinn 10y ago> A part of me recognizes the hospital is acting in the interests of my child. But even if I were a drug user, does that justify turning delivery into something criminal? At what point do the rights of my child outweigh my own? rights to have a "birth experience" according to a wishlist, possibly at the expense of the child? At more or less every point I would assume.
- isidoreSeville 10y agoJust as Nature intended, I will birth my child into this kiddie pool and the first thing that it sees will be Beyoncé
- Houshalter 10y agoThat, and the right to not be treated like a criminal, not be tested without consent, and not be stressed out for weeks over fear of her baby being taken away.
- MustardTiger 10y agoYou're having the abortion debate with yourself.
- blucoat 10y agoI think most arguments for abortion rely heavily on the right of the mother to bodily autonomy. That is, once the baby is delivered, those arguments fall apart. Breastfeeding your child because you want the "experience" is completely different.
- jacalata 10y agobreastfeeding is a hell of a lot more than 'an experience'
- MustardTiger 10y agoBreastfeeding is objectively in the best interests of the child. The "birthing experience" is what was being mocked.
- googletazer 10y agoLawsuit against the hospital thats what the lady needs to do. Would be a nice college fund for her kid.
- theandrewbailey 10y agoAnd continue to drive up unaffordable medical costs?
- Kristine1975 10y agoYes. The solution for high medical costs isn't less lawsuits, it's UHC.
- tropo 10y agoUnited Health Care is pretty bad. They are always finding some excuse to not pay. I suggest Blue Cross Blue Shield, at least the PPO.
- FordPrefectAO 10y agoI'm not GP, but UHC = universal health care, presumably single payer health care
- tropo 10y agoSee for yourself: http://www.uhc.com/ http://www.uhc.com/ OK, it's UnitedHealthcare® if you want silly capitalization.
- googletazer 10y agoThats the idea. Bankrupt the shitty institutions that are careless or make too many mistakes and let the good ones grow. Kind of like performance reviews we get in the industry (not to say they aren't flawed but still)
- masklinn 10y ago
- OhHeyItsE 10y ago[deleted]
- aardshark 10y agoCome on, that's pretty understandable given a previous stillbirth.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- transfire 10y ago> My doula rubs lavender essential oil on my temples, and my husband plays “Push It,” the Spotify playlist I created for labor and delivery. I have a photo of Beyoncé propped up on the over-bed table, because if anything can inspire me, it’s Queen Bey. That poor, poor child.
- kordless 10y agoYou are speaking for others - which is basically what the article is about. Judgment sucks and it's much easier than speaking your own truths - for example, do you have children and/or gone through birth?
- jscott0918 10y agoHow is this "Speaking for others"? OP provided their perspective in comments. You having a different perspective is valid and is not threatened by the point of view of OP.
- kordless 10y ago> That poor, poor child. That's speaking for the child. Speaking for someone else's feelings besides your own is speaking for others. And, it's not a perspective either, it's an opinion how someone else would feel in the situation, which is NOT a different perspective you can hold, given you aren't the other person. Stick to what you know, is the basic lesson.
- 6stringmerc 10y agoLet me state right out I don't think this person deserved such treatment, and basic critical thinking and cross-checking the prescription for the inhaler (which surely should've been a phone call away?) in theory absolves the issue. It's just, well, personal experience leads me to be wary of medical care, not simply hit autopilot and think things will turn out great. It can from time to time! But, hey, this kind of story is an excellent caution...this is why it's very, very important to pester the ever loving dogsh!t out of your health-care provider to have every single detail prepared in your file before going into - essentially - the custody of a medical facility. No matter how many times it might seem stupid for me to reiterate that with my condition I can't have any blood thinners - no Aspirin specifically - I simply don't trust anybody new with being, well, competent enough to make the connection themselves. I police what goes into my body with pretty good results. I go out of my way, time and again, to discuss my specific treatment needs and precautions. Granted, not everything is in my control, but the things I can monitor, I do try to get a handle on.
- tptacek 10y agoSomething similar happened to us. When she was 4 years old, our daughter had a string of unexplained severe seizures over the course of 8 hours or so, and she too tested positive for methamphetamine at the hospital. What made it especially bad was the fact that my daughter was in the middle of a medical emergency, and the staff at the hospital were wasting time on a ludicrous "meth" hypothesis.
- JshWright 10y agoI understand why it was ludicrous from your perspective. It was not, however, ludicrous for them to spend time ruling it out. New onset seizures (particularly a string of seizures) are unusual for a kid. Methamphetamine causes seizures. There are ways a child could have been exposed to meth that a parent wouldn't know about (another caretaker left it lying around, a preschool friend brought it in for "show and tell" and no one noticed, etc...). It was prudent on their part to consider it as a possible cause of your daughter's seizures. A positive meth test for a seizure patient (of any age) would certainly raise my index of suspicion enough to thoroughly explore the possibility of intentional or accidental ingestion. I totally get why you would perceive them as "wasting time" (and obviously I wasn't there, it's entirely possible they were), but it's very likely they were running down all the other "normal" differential diagnoses in parallel.
- TillE 10y agoYou're vastly overestimating the average competence and concern that most human beings have when doing their jobs. I've seen multiple instances with family members where the doctor's dumbass hypothesis absolutely did not match the symptoms, but they persisted in trying the worthless treatment anyway. Took 'em months to find and start treating the slightly rare form of cancer. Bring on the diagnostic computers, I say.
- JshWright 10y agoI know a lot of ER docs (I assume this story took place in an ER). Some are better than others, but I can't think of any that I wouldn't consider "above average" relative to "most human beings". I'll absolutely agree with you in terms of primary care docs... As someone who routinely transports patients out of doctor's offices when the doc is in over their head, there is a _much_ broader variation in competency...
- ted12345 10y agoShe wasn't "treated like a criminal" because she tested positive to a preliminary test. She was treated like a criminal because she insisted on breastfeeding her baby despite several positive test results. I think the mature thing to do would be to wait for the 2 week test to come back and not breastfeed your child in the meantime. Even if you know you haven't done meth, I would think the risk that you somehow have been exposed to meth should outweigh the desire to breastfeed. The hospital is more concerned about the health of the baby than the desire of a new mother to validate their motherhood by breastfeeding. Seems okay to me.
- Kristine1975 10y ago>She wasn't "treated like a criminal" because she tested positive to a preliminary test. She was treated like a criminal because she insisted on breastfeeding her baby despite several positive test results. She was treated like a criminal before giving birth, though. >you somehow have been exposed to meth How exactly do you get exposed to meth? >than the desire of a new mother to validate their motherhood by breastfeeding You're reading an awful lot into her desire to breastfeed her child.
- davidjgraph 10y agoIf she did not breastfeed for the first 2 weeks it's unlikely she'd be able to start suddenly, her milk might simply have dried up. My wife wasn't able to breastfeed 1 of our 5 children and this alone caused her a degree of post-natal depression through feeling guility (no depression with the other 4). I suspect you're male and don't have children, talk to mothers about the importance of breast feeding to them, you'll find this isn't a subject to be logical over.
- zaroth 10y agoPump and dump is an option, so that mom keeps lactating, but not foolproof. The baby needs to learn how to latch on and if they are given a bottle for 2 weeks will likely refuse to breastfeed (e.g. baby turns into a frustrated screaming terror while mom sobs). But the more important point is the emotional and hormonal impact of breastfeeding on the mom, and health benefits of breastfeeding for the baby. Breastfeeding is monumentally important for some mothers. Mom has every right to insist on breastfeeding even in the face of a test she knows to be a false positive.
- zoner 10y agoI would mention lawyers and lawsuits a lot more during the visit in this hospital and definitely sue them with a 500 pages long claim. It's fighting law with law. If they were draw a sword, I would draw mine too.
- masklinn 10y ago> I would mention lawyers and lawsuits a lot more during the visit in this hospital and definitely sue them with a 500 pages long claim. That would be idiotic, nonsensical and a very good way to make current and future interactions even worse. Hospitals are mandatory reporters, if they don't report suspicious situations (such as a pregnant mother failing a drug test) they're on the hook for it, and they must prepare for a possible NAS case which is anything but fun, or a walk in the park. And despite the completely one-sided report, it looks like much of the antipathy came from her insisting on her "experience" and on e.g. breastfeeding the child.
- pigpaws 10y agothe issue isn't the mandatory reporting. The issue was the way they treated here AFTER the two known-to-be-spurious tests, neither of which were blood draws which are vastly more accurate. So, yes, a lawsuit would be in order (IMO). I wouldn't ask for a huge payday, but at the very least that they clean up their testing procedures and follow protocols.
- masklinn 10y ago> The issue was the way they treated here AFTER the two known-to-be-spurious tests The tests were not known to be spurious by the hospital. > neither of which were blood draws which are vastly more accurate. Blood draws tests are also much longer (that's the 2~3 weeks test whose results they got afterwards). > I wouldn't ask for a huge payday Not that you'd get any even if you did. > at the very least that they clean up their testing procedures and follow protocols. Is there any protocol you know them to not have followed? Keeping in mind that the one account we have is the one-sided version of the parents, consider the hospital's point of view: what they have is an expectant mother who has twice failed a drug test and thus a NAS risk, a nearly DOA newborn from emergency C-section and the possibly drug-addicted mother thereafter insists on breastfeeding.
- calebsurfs 10y agoThis is interesting because I'm a nurse and I deal with people who occasionally test positive for methamphetamine. We've found that many of these people take Zantac (aka ranitidine, used for acid reflux). This hasn't been studied since 1991[0] but it probably should be again, given increasing rates of meth use. I wish the author had given the name of her prescription inhaler- Vick's Vapor inhaler has been shown to test positive but albuterol and other steroid inhalers are more common. [0] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2051743 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2051743
- maxerickson 10y agoIt is clearly stated to be albuterol. My husband scrolls through pages of information about albuterol inhalers and drug tests. He shows his phone to every nurse who steps foot in the room.
- calebsurfs 10y agoOops, thanks. Cross-reactivity studies don't seem to be published often but searching for albuterol + 'cross reactivity' shows some drug tests are cross reactive with albuterol and some aren't.
- cauterized 10y agoOh, man, that's scary. My doctor suggested using Zantac to help with flare-ups of a chronic stomach condition. Now I'm going to be much more wary.
- snegu 10y agoDamn, Zantac is the only thing that has made my third trimester bearable. I'm wondering if this is a serious enough risk that I should stop taking it as my due date approaches. May ask my midwife at my next visit.
- zer00eyz 10y agoWhen I was a kid: I rode a bike without a helmet I played outside, by my self, and would sometimes go MILES from my house. We did stupid stuff, with fire, fireworks and the like. My parents left me home alone after school, I was a latch key kid. Today, the police would bring my kids home and I would get a visit from CPS for any of these things. Welcome to having children in the new millennium.
- pigpaws 10y agoI was told that it 'takes a village' to tell you that you're not being a good parent... Apparently someone without skin in the game can do it better.
- mlvljr 10y agoWe all did that (I -- in the USSR and even much more dangerous post-USSR of the 90s, btw.) :)
- facepalm 10y agoSurvivor bias, although I don't actually recall many kids who didn't make it.
- PhasmaFelis 10y agoI do think kids should be allowed to roam, but as a cyclist I'm not convinced that being allowed to ride without a helmet is a crucial formative experience. It's not a trade-off, it's just irresponsible.
- mmariani 10y agoAs a road cyclist I say sure, it's not sane to ride at an average of 40kph (25mph) without a helmet. However, as a commuter cyclist I say nonsense! Where I live almost everybody 8 to 80 years old rides without a helmet -- just little kids do because they're still learning -- for a simple reason, no one rides faster than 20kph. Cycling should be about being free and having fun. A helmet sends the opposite message which is not good when you want people to cycle instead of driving their lives away.
- ryandrake 10y agoSorry to be negative, but I'm not sure I understand what I should be outraged about. She tested positive for meth. The hospital advised her on all the things they probably advise to everyone else in that situation, they tested the baby for meth (came back negative), and they did an additional, more thorough test later (came back negative), and finally mom and dad are off to be parents. CPS was never even involved. I guess the article is about how a few nurses were mean and made her feel sad, because not much else seemed to happen. If you really want to feel injustice and helplessness, why not try getting arrested for something you didn't do. Spend a few nights in jail, and deal with police, lawyers, judges, lose your job and friends because of it, find yourself on a bunch of lists you've never been on before, etc. That's what "being crushed by a system" is like.
- ars 10y agoI don't think you realize how emotionally fragile new mothers are.
- OneTwoFree 10y agoMaybe she just left out from the story, but why didn't she say "But I didn't take any meth! I didn't even drink any alcohol! After a miscarriage I'd never do anything like that! Is it possible that the test is wrong?"
- Domenic_S 10y agoYou, the filthy unwashed public: "Is it possible that the test is wrong?" Them, apparently omnipotent gods: silent shaking of head and look of pity
- masklinn 10y agoHad they been certain the test was right, CPS would have been hovering over the birthing bed and the parents would have risked carting to a cell. That's not what happened.
- gozur88 10y agoDoctors are like cops in that they're used to being lied to, particularly by drug users. Telling a doctor "I didn't take meth" when he has a positive test result is likely to mean exactly nothing unless you have a long term existing doctor-patient relationship.
- burfog 10y agoThis is a big part of why homebirth is gaining popularity. It's just family and maybe a midwife. Nobody is going to do a meth test. The doors don't lock you inside, unable to escape without permission. (that security is NOT to protect the baby from strangers; it's so CPS can take your baby) Also: There is no need to drive madly to the hospital. There will be no incentive to keep you for exactly how long your insurance will pay, nor to perform surgery. You get to sleep in your own bed, without constant beeping and light from the hallway. You can have as many visitors as you want. You will never be separated from your baby, not even for a moment. You won't be treated like a potential criminal. You get respect.
- masklinn 10y agoAnd if there's trouble and the kid[0] dies[1] you can just say that was "their journey" and wash your hands from it. Hell, you might even "get respect" and praises for having killed your kid, go you. But hey, CPS didn't get to take your kid[2], so there's that. [0] or the mother, or both [1] which is anything but rare, even in the UK under obstetric care[3] > The risk of dying on the day of birth (0.43 per 1000, or 430 micromorts) exceeds that of any other average day of life until the 92nd year. and matches the risks of major surgery. Homebirth, especially with completely unqualified midwives (which is the rule in the US) is almost an order of magnitude more risky[4]. [2] the coroner did, to check for foul play [3] http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1471-0528.12544/full http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1471-0528.12544/f... [4] https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2013R1/Downloads/CommitteeMeetingDocument/8585 https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2013R1/Downloads/CommitteeM...
- Domenic_S 10y agoThat's just an ignorant response. There are plenty of board-certified midwives, birthing centers, etc. Importantly, a great deal of risk can be ascertained before labor, and like any other medical procedure you're either a good candidate for non-hospital birth or you're not.
- jmcgough 10y ago
- csense 10y agoIf this happens on a regular basis and people find out about it, people will stop going to the hospital to give birth, raising the rate of mortality and complications for infants and mothers. Anyone who has a basic understanding of Bayes' Theorem can tell you that testing all new mothers for X (where X is relatively rare among new mothers) will lead to a large number of false positives even if the test has high specificity and sensitivity, simply because the prior probability for X is so low.
- serge2k 10y agoWhich is why they did a second test, tested the baby, and did a third test. More screwed up is the fact that it took weeks to get the correct result, and that innocent people have to live in fear of CPS coming and taking away their newborn.
- hackbinary 10y agoCPS means something different in the UK, Crown Prosecution Service.
- pavedwalden 10y ago"Child Protective Services" in the US, to save Brits the google.
- SteveGerencser 10y agoI have had to deal with CPS in behalf of family members more than once and I have come to the conclusion that there is no group more terrifying than one that was supposed to protect children and has turned into something entirely different.
- stcredzero 10y agopeople will stop going to the hospital to give birth, raising the rate of mortality and complications for infants and mothers. According to Healthcare Triage, home births have an overall lower risk of complications. It's only in the cases of things going spectacularly wrong that being in the hospital helps. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHWvSPhENtk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHWvSPhENtk It fits with my view of things: If there's something really broken, go to the hospital to get it fixed. However, if you're fine, you're better off avoiding the place. (Do get checkups from a doctor you have a good relationship with.)
- pessimizer 10y agoWhy is the state using birth as grounds for a search? edit: If the answer is "will someone think of the children!" why isn't the state randomly drug testing all parents?
- maxerickson 10y agoThe drug test is relevant to providing care to the mother. In the case of a delivery, I think it is reasonable to consider the results of the test while providing care for the child. It's obviously a thorny question, but what should a facility that treats children do when it notices a conflict between the interests of the child and the interests of the parent? It's clearly going to happen.
- roosterjm2k2 10y agoDrug testing around childbirth is a wreck and needs to be seriously looked into... My second son was premature... when we were in the NICU... there was a lady there, whos child was born premature because the taxi she was riding in from the airport was involved in an accident. She came from california... where her gyno was pro-mj, and she used MJ to manage her Hyperemesis gravidarum... so its in her system, clearly... but this is Texas... so even though her doc recommended it, not only was her child in the NICU, but when he got out, he didnt get to go home with her... because of stupid laws that pay no mind to actual scientific evidence...
- frotak 10y agoI think this piece captures brilliantly the emotional and psychological toll that rote and thoughtless application of harsh procedures and mindless judgment can be wrought on people by an uncaring system. When my daughter was conceived her mother was addicted to opiates. We were both in a bad place. I was just out of a relationship with someone with Borderline Personality Disorder and she was coming out of her own abusive relationship. Needless to say this wasn't how either of us had envisioned conception. But her pregnancy was a strong motivator to turn things around. But addiction isn't something you can just switch of. Especially something like an opioid. It is extremely dangerous to the fetus for the mother to detox during pregnancy. Miscarriage is common. But that doesn't mean that treatment isn't an option. That treatment is, however, most commonly something like opioid maintenance in the form of methadone. Methadone is still an opioid (although longer acting and "harder to abuse"). It still comes with the same risk of NAS. But that risk is actually fairly low. In researching the risks around my daughter's birth I came to find that only about 1/3rd of all babies born to opiate addicted women suffered NAS, and the greatest correlation was tied to usage of multiple illicit substances (say opioids and amphetamines together) So we dedicated ourselves to having a healthy pregnancy and a healthy baby and she started methadone maintenance at a local clinic. In the end my daughter was born four weeks premature (premature birth is actual common in opioid addicts). The author of this story did an excellent job of capturing how the atmosphere changed as soon as it was discovered that my wife was under a maintenance dose of methadone. The derisive judgment. The loathing in the eyes of the nurses. That was a very new experience for me. And the procedures and policies described in the article are actually in many ways detrimental to and harmful to the outcome for the infant. Opportunities for bonding should be encouraged. And at least in the case of opiates it has been found that breastfeeding decreases the risk of NAS and should be encouraged (opiate concentration in breastmilk of a woman using opiates is measured in micrograms, far below the threshold to affect the infant, but the simple skin on skin contact and intimacy seems to make all the difference). My daughter did not suffer from NAS and after three days of observation we were discharged when it was clear her lungs were fine and she was not going to suffer withdrawals. Thankfully the attitudes of the nurses changed within about the first day. I suppose we weren't typical of "addict" parents...but I can say that being on the receiving end of that sort of experience...the only effect is going to be to push addicts further down a hole with even less chance of being healthy, functional parents.
- carc 10y agoSometimes I think that the HN crowd is less prone to very non-scientific biases than the general public, or a place where I'm less likely to see people throwing around things that sound like facts that are mostly psuedo-science. Then threads like this happen.
- jff 10y ago> My doula rubs lavender essential oil on my temples, and my husband plays “Push It,” the Spotify playlist I created for labor and delivery. I have a photo of Beyoncé propped up on the over-bed table, because if anything can inspire me, it’s Queen Bey. Also on the table is my birth plan, which is kind of like a wish list for delivery. That includes modest requests, like keeping the door to my room closed, as well as more imperative things, like, “Please delay all routine procedures on the baby until after the bonding and breastfeeding period.” > The bulk of my produce was organic, my drinking water purified through a reverse-osmosis system. I used clove oil on a persistent toothache instead of visiting the dentist, because I didn’t want any anesthetic to pass through my body and into the placenta. During all 42 weeks, the hardest drugs that entered my body were prenatal vitamins and puffs from my prescription asthma inhaler. "But... I'm white! I'm middle-class! I have a doula! It's patently absurd that these nurses could think I did drugs! Just look at me! What do you mean that's exactly what a drug user would say?" From her point of view she's a perfect mommy, but as far as the nurses and doctors know, she's just somebody who showed up pregnant with meth in her system and an unlicensed hippie who's smearing lavender oil around the place.