I grew up during the ‘50’s in a limited family who had escaped Hitler, or had already been in the US and experienced the depression. At family gatherings everyone praised FDR and voiced support for Adlai Stevenson. Protesting against Vietnam in the ‘60’s and as much of a member of SDS as anyone could be, my political was always democrat or more extreme. Humphrey was a disappointment/sellout.
Those days have past. Now, day after day we read of egregious actions against people and democracy, and all those actions are those of democrats. We read of slanted media, all of whom are democrats.
My father’s (1903-1992) democrat party ceased to exist long ago. While republicans are also afflicted with a new SDS (spending derangement syndrome), I am more likely to support them having a hand in running our government.
Of one thing I am certain, today is democrats have no shame.
Not an OB nurse but aware of the high Black mortality rate during labor and postpartum. To me the change in policy must be evaluated as risk (to the mother and newborn) versus benefits. If the maternal mortality rate increases at Mass Gen Brigham post initiation of this policy, then the risks have outweighed the benefits.
Reading a little bit more about this, it seems like automatically referring moms on medication assisted treatment is going to stop. I think that is a good thing because you don't want to penalize moms who are trying to the do the right thing.
I am on a statewide panel looking at the optimal treatment of the mother-baby dyad affected by substance use disorder. Who to test is the trickiest part of all of this. Ideally, women would be honest about their drug use but that will never happen. So how do you decide who to test? How do you test fairly? How do you use the information to really do the best for the family?
"It also limits testing to circumstances where results 'will change the medical management of the pregnant person or infant.'" In our institutation, every single infant that has a known drug exposure stays in the hospital for 5 days to watch for withdrawal signs. We treat them with morphine if they show significant symptoms. Regardless, these babies are at risk for poor feeding, excessive weight loss, fragmented sleep, and being difficult to console. We use those 5 days to teach the families how to best care for these infants that may be more "challenging." Not all babies are but the extra skills don't hurt. These babies are also at risk for long term developmental delay and vision problems. So we want to be sure these families have close follow up with their pediatricians and eye doctors. We also want to hook the families up with extra resources to encourage parenting success.
You just can't make this stuff up anymore. It's extending into every area of our society in dangerous ways as well. United airlines for example recently stated they have a goal of 50% woman and minority pilots, never mind there aren't even half that many qualified woman and minority commercial pilots in the entire US...
And the outcomes of these policies create racism. Nobody previously would have thought: hmm, did my pilot get hired because of their skin color, or their qualifications?
I read Mass General Brigham's statement. Ignoring the gobbledygook about pregnant people and inequity, the goal seems to be to encourage addicted pregnant mothers to seek treatment without fear of losing their child or incarceration. The "inequity" is more pregnant black women are tested than white women. Just test them all.
What about the fetus/baby. Did Dr. Wakeman forget that Ob-Gyns are treating two patients at once? So when a baby is showing withdrawl symptoms, we shouldn't know the cause? Or is testing the baby and trying to figure out the best way to treat acutely and long term also racist?
It's a slippery slope bring wokeness into medicine.
Mass General Brigham’s argument for not testing is similar to the argument against police stopping motorists for violation. Too many were black or brown, so just stop checking. Thus, creating greater public safety on the roadways. Check San Francisco’s data on the number of traffic violations issued per year from 2015 and 2023. Trust me, motorists did not get better at obeying traffic rules.
The Hippocratic Oath requires a physician to "First, do no harm.". It would behoove Mass General to remember that, if they are to be considered physicians first and not social engineers first.
This is why I dislike identity politics. Everyone is assigned to a group. The INDIVIDUAL doesn't count. In this case it is the INDIVIDUAL baby who gets hurt the most. And the mother is denied a chance to get clean. Unbelievable.
And who suffers the most from this policy? Black babies. Who suffers the most from “harm reduction” policy: blacks. Who suffers most from teacher union run inner city schools: black children. Oh, but these white liberals feel so good and morally superior. Good job.
So many children enter school with brains damaged by the mother’s drug use. We are still learning how drug use affects male sperm. These kids struggle to learn and many have behavior disorders. This anti-racist policy will only hurt these children for the rest of their lives.
"black pregnant people versus white pregnant people" seems to be the goal of this cohort of Hippocratic Oath people, though they're too one-minded to see it. (I can tell without looking that they're mostly progressive white women who are unable to appreciate the fact that "harm" happens to everyone, all the time, and not just to their special-nook people.) It's a bit ironic, given hospital fears of malpractice suits, but lawsuits will surely result from this approach to playing god in a white coat.
I grew up during the ‘50’s in a limited family who had escaped Hitler, or had already been in the US and experienced the depression. At family gatherings everyone praised FDR and voiced support for Adlai Stevenson. Protesting against Vietnam in the ‘60’s and as much of a member of SDS as anyone could be, my political was always democrat or more extreme. Humphrey was a disappointment/sellout.
Those days have past. Now, day after day we read of egregious actions against people and democracy, and all those actions are those of democrats. We read of slanted media, all of whom are democrats.
My father’s (1903-1992) democrat party ceased to exist long ago. While republicans are also afflicted with a new SDS (spending derangement syndrome), I am more likely to support them having a hand in running our government.
Of one thing I am certain, today is democrats have no shame.
Not an OB nurse but aware of the high Black mortality rate during labor and postpartum. To me the change in policy must be evaluated as risk (to the mother and newborn) versus benefits. If the maternal mortality rate increases at Mass Gen Brigham post initiation of this policy, then the risks have outweighed the benefits.
Reading a little bit more about this, it seems like automatically referring moms on medication assisted treatment is going to stop. I think that is a good thing because you don't want to penalize moms who are trying to the do the right thing.
I am on a statewide panel looking at the optimal treatment of the mother-baby dyad affected by substance use disorder. Who to test is the trickiest part of all of this. Ideally, women would be honest about their drug use but that will never happen. So how do you decide who to test? How do you test fairly? How do you use the information to really do the best for the family?
"It also limits testing to circumstances where results 'will change the medical management of the pregnant person or infant.'" In our institutation, every single infant that has a known drug exposure stays in the hospital for 5 days to watch for withdrawal signs. We treat them with morphine if they show significant symptoms. Regardless, these babies are at risk for poor feeding, excessive weight loss, fragmented sleep, and being difficult to console. We use those 5 days to teach the families how to best care for these infants that may be more "challenging." Not all babies are but the extra skills don't hurt. These babies are also at risk for long term developmental delay and vision problems. So we want to be sure these families have close follow up with their pediatricians and eye doctors. We also want to hook the families up with extra resources to encourage parenting success.
You just can't make this stuff up anymore. It's extending into every area of our society in dangerous ways as well. United airlines for example recently stated they have a goal of 50% woman and minority pilots, never mind there aren't even half that many qualified woman and minority commercial pilots in the entire US...
And the outcomes of these policies create racism. Nobody previously would have thought: hmm, did my pilot get hired because of their skin color, or their qualifications?
I read Mass General Brigham's statement. Ignoring the gobbledygook about pregnant people and inequity, the goal seems to be to encourage addicted pregnant mothers to seek treatment without fear of losing their child or incarceration. The "inequity" is more pregnant black women are tested than white women. Just test them all.
"pregnant people", "substance use disorder"
Do we have a national 'Punch a "progressive" Day' in the USA yet? We're beyond the need.
So politics is a medical condition?
What about the fetus/baby. Did Dr. Wakeman forget that Ob-Gyns are treating two patients at once? So when a baby is showing withdrawl symptoms, we shouldn't know the cause? Or is testing the baby and trying to figure out the best way to treat acutely and long term also racist?
It's a slippery slope bring wokeness into medicine.
A racist policy that assures an increase in bad outcomes for Black babies.
Marxists have already murdered more than 100 million people in the name of “equity” since 1917.
What’s a few more dead black babies if it makes the Socialist omelet?
Mass General Brigham’s argument for not testing is similar to the argument against police stopping motorists for violation. Too many were black or brown, so just stop checking. Thus, creating greater public safety on the roadways. Check San Francisco’s data on the number of traffic violations issued per year from 2015 and 2023. Trust me, motorists did not get better at obeying traffic rules.
The Hippocratic Oath requires a physician to "First, do no harm.". It would behoove Mass General to remember that, if they are to be considered physicians first and not social engineers first.
This is why I dislike identity politics. Everyone is assigned to a group. The INDIVIDUAL doesn't count. In this case it is the INDIVIDUAL baby who gets hurt the most. And the mother is denied a chance to get clean. Unbelievable.
And who suffers the most from this policy? Black babies. Who suffers the most from “harm reduction” policy: blacks. Who suffers most from teacher union run inner city schools: black children. Oh, but these white liberals feel so good and morally superior. Good job.
So many children enter school with brains damaged by the mother’s drug use. We are still learning how drug use affects male sperm. These kids struggle to learn and many have behavior disorders. This anti-racist policy will only hurt these children for the rest of their lives.
"black pregnant people versus white pregnant people" seems to be the goal of this cohort of Hippocratic Oath people, though they're too one-minded to see it. (I can tell without looking that they're mostly progressive white women who are unable to appreciate the fact that "harm" happens to everyone, all the time, and not just to their special-nook people.) It's a bit ironic, given hospital fears of malpractice suits, but lawsuits will surely result from this approach to playing god in a white coat.