Although I find highly objectionable the way most laboring mothers and their newborns are treated in America today, I'm still in favor of most newborn screening. It did hurt to hear my grandchildren's cries as they received the heel stick required to get blood for the testing, but it was over quickly and their mommy was able to soothe them immediately. The advantage of discovering or ruling out certain devastating, but treatable, conditions is worth the small trauma. I'm not happy about the idea that such screening is often mandatory, but the idea itself is a good one.
So I was naturally interested in reading this article on the March of Dimes' call for still more newborn testing. I'm not sure how I feel about that, not knowing anything about many of the conditions they want to include. What inspired me to write was another example of the futility of trying to get more than general information out of a news report, even one with hyperlinks.The article includes this comment:
The conditions involved in newborn screening are rare, but can be very severe. These tests are important because each of the 29 conditions on the March of Dimes list is either curable or highly treatable as long as it is found within 48 hours after birth.
Yet if you follow the link to see what they have to say about Pennsylvania, you'll find the following:
So, to be effective the tests must be completed and the results known by 48 hours after birth, yet if the test is performed prior to 36 hours it must be repeated. That sounds to me as if babies born in Pennsylvania must be screened twice, which I'm sure is not the case. No wonder the article includes the disclaimer, "It's very important for parents to ask their doctor."Screening Requirements
Required by law on all infants, with a second test required if initial screen is done prior to 36 hrs.
