Did anyone opt out of a Newborn Screening?

drewiekc · July 2010

Seriously OP, it's people like you who give all the natural mamas a bad name. You are truly an embarassment.

Mrs_Liberto · July 2010

yeshuahamasshiah:
fallbride_2004:
If you want to act out your conspiracy theories when the consequences will be yours, go right ahead. Please don't subject an innocent baby to a possibility of a reduced quality of life because you are on a kick. How many horrible stories are out there from screening and what actually happened? Have them destroy the DNA if you feel better.

You do know that they could secretly sneak in and get the DNA at some point if they wanted to do so BSC thing don't you? (jk)You are going to have to let your child interact with the world unless you put a bubble around him/her. If you do make a bubble baby, what will that child do when you are gone since you will probably die first?

World interaction?? are you nuts? DH, DS and I live in a family bubble, also when one dies, we all do!
Not to mention that a "reduced quality of life" is what all schizophrenic whack jobs like myself aim for. Thanks for your concern though.

You're the only one who thinks you're funny.

yeshuahamasshiah · July 2010

drewiekc:
Seriously OP, it's people like you who give all the natural mamas a bad name. You are truly an embarassment.

I am sorry you feel that way. I have chosen to birth naturally for many reasons as I am choosing to do many other things based on my personal research.

I am not the one calling anyone names and the one time I did cross the line with a fellow bumpie I acknowledged my immaturity and apologized.

If you do not agree with my point of view, you are more than entitled to that, just as I am entitled to mine. If you have a problem with my posts report me to a mod and let them decide if I am out of line to state my views. Until then I am perfectly happy with being a part of this board and learning/reading from other NB mama's experiences.

htomeo · July 2010

yeshuahamasshiah:
World interaction?? are you nuts? DH, DS and I live in a family bubble, also when one dies, we all do!
Not to mention that a "reduced quality of life" is what all schizophrenic whack jobs like myself aim for. Thanks for your concern though.

Please use your word choice wisely. If someone is schizophrenic, it does not mean they are a "whack job".

talltalltrees · July 2010

I think it is awesome that you are making crucial medical decisions about your child's health based on stuff you read on the internet.

ETA: I see you're not vaxing either, so if you don't give a *** about your child dying of pertussis or meningitis, you probably don't give a *** about your child dying or having brain damage from a metabolic disorder either.

fallbride_2004 · July 2010

I'm sorry, but I have to say it out of concern for that baby. Not getting screening is child neglect in my opinion. It is the child that could suffer if there is a condition that goes untreated until it is irreversible. Not getting the whooping cough vax could pass that on to other children, since even a vaccinated child has to build up immunity after the shot and even then there is a slight chance. That is why it is important for all children to have protection for a disease that is currently cropping up again.

Do you not feel any responsibility for other children if your child infects them? This is a serious disease that can be fatal. Does that seriously not bother you? Is that better than worrying about some DNA sample that you could have destroyed?

If you think the government is the big bad wolf, why does your husband work for it? Why do you allow it to finance your family? You have clearly made some kind of compromise here, but not for the health of your baby and others?

LoriFalce · July 2010

You have some quality info there.

Did the nutjob that forwarded it to you send you a baby-sized tinfoil hat, too? zOMG! Did you hear that Marilyn Manson is really the kid from The Wonder Years, all growed up???

MegGary · July 2010

There was this story on cnn.com awhile back.

Here's the link: https://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/02/04/baby.dna.government/index.html?hpt=Sbin

I'm all for pre-screening. I think it's highly important. What I don't care for is that the Gov't can & does, according to this article & the supporting website, store our babies DNA indefinitely. Also the DNA is stored with our children's name's attached to it. That concerns me.

What also bothers me is that they don't tell parents that they are doing these tests. Why? Why not just be honest & up front? They tell us that they are testing our babies hearing when they are born. Why not these tests? Thats what bothers me about it all.

Would any of this make me opt out of newborn screening? No it wouldn't. The need for my child's well-being outweighs the risk of what the answers to those questions are.

ToledoDeux · July 2010

MegGary:
There was this story on cnn.com awhile back.
Here's the link: https://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/02/04/baby.dna.government/index.html?hpt=Sbin
I'm all for pre-screening. I think it's highly important. What I don't care for is that the Gov't can & does, according to this article & the supporting website, store our babies DNA indefinitely. Also the DNA is stored with our children's name's attached to it. That concerns me.
What also bothers me is that they don't tell parents that they are doing these tests. Why? Why not just be honest & up front? They tell us that they are testing our babies hearing when they are born. Why not these tests? Thats what bothers me about it all.
Would any of this make me opt out of newborn screening? No it wouldn't. The need for my child's well-being outweighs the risk of what the answers to those questions are.

I live in MN (same as the woman in that article) and was notified about the screening before each of my children's births. It is state law that parents be notified about the testing and retaining of testing material, and that parents have the right to refuse such testing or allow testing but have the samples and test results destroyed.

This has been on the books since 2003, so I'm not sure how this woman missed the info.

roundtheworldgirl · July 2010

ToledoDeux:
I don't understand how people this paranoid get by on a day-to-day basis.

This is so unnecessary.

roundtheworldgirl · July 2010

Mrs_Liberto:
Government conspiracy mumbo-jumbo over a heel prick and a few drops of blood that can save your child's life?
Maybe you need to go live in that bunker with the person who thinks it's annoying that the government wants to vaccinate us.

Seriously, why the need to stoop to personal attacks?

MegGary · July 2010

ToledoDeux:
MegGary:
There was this story on cnn.com awhile back.
Here's the link: https://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/02/04/baby.dna.government/index.html?hpt=Sbin
I'm all for pre-screening. I think it's highly important. What I don't care for is that the Gov't can & does, according to this article & the supporting website, store our babies DNA indefinitely. Also the DNA is stored with our children's name's attached to it. That concerns me.
What also bothers me is that they don't tell parents that they are doing these tests. Why? Why not just be honest & up front? They tell us that they are testing our babies hearing when they are born. Why not these tests? Thats what bothers me about it all.
Would any of this make me opt out of newborn screening? No it wouldn't. The need for my child's well-being outweighs the risk of what the answers to those questions are.

I live in MN (same as the woman in that article) and was notified about the screening before each of my children's births. It is state law that parents be notified about the testing and retaining of testing material, and that parents have the right to refuse such testing or allow testing but have the samples and test results destroyed.
This has been on the books since 2003, so I'm not sure how this woman missed the info.

Interesting. I wonder how she did miss it. Maybe her doctors didn't inform her. I know that when I was pregnant I was given a packet of information & that was it. No one went over it with me. No one discussed it with me or sat down to answer my questions. When I called the doctors office to ask question about pre-screening they asked, didn't you get the packet? My dr did call me back & talk to me at length about my options. I was fortunate that he took the time. I guess not all doctors are as proactive when it comes to educating their patients. Just another reason we as patients need to be our own advocates.

I will add that I never did know about the newborn screening. I honestly thought that they just got the APGAR. I'm diabetic so DD had her sugar tested when born. They did that a few times. They never mentioned any other tests they where performing. Well except the hearing. Which I was there for.

Mrs_Liberto · July 2010

roundtheworldgirl:
Mrs_Liberto:
Government conspiracy mumbo-jumbo over a heel prick and a few drops of blood that can save your child's life?
Maybe you need to go live in that bunker with the person who thinks it's annoying that the government wants to vaccinate us.
Seriously, why the need to stoop to personal attacks?

if you think that is a personal attack then you need to get off the nest and grow a thicker skin. I could call the OP an ignorant, ethnocentric, biitch for her asswipe comments about the mentally ill and overweight people... THAT would be a personal attack. And it still would be warranted. As it stands now, the Op is just a run of the mill idiot who has spent too much time contriving conspiracy theories in complete absence of rational thought, sound judgment, or scientific research.

ToledoDeux · July 2010

roundtheworldgirl:
ToledoDeux:
I don't understand how people this paranoid get by on a day-to-day basis.
This is so unnecessary.

Necessary is in the eye of the beholder.

LoriFalce · July 2010

MegGary:
ToledoDeux:
MegGary:

There was this story on cnn.com awhile back.

Here's the link: https://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/02/04/baby.dna.government/index.html?hpt=Sbin

I'm all for pre-screening. I think it's highly important. What I don't care for is that the Gov't can & does, according to this article & the supporting website, store our babies DNA indefinitely. Also the DNA is stored with our children's name's attached to it. That concerns me.

What also bothers me is that they don't tell parents that they are doing these tests. Why? Why not just be honest & up front? They tell us that they are testing our babies hearing when they are born. Why not these tests? Thats what bothers me about it all.

Would any of this make me opt out of newborn screening? No it wouldn't. The need for my child's well-being outweighs the risk of what the answers to those questions are.

I live in MN (same as the woman in that article) and was notified about the screening before each of my children's births. It is state law that parents be notified about the testing and retaining of testing material, and that parents have the right to refuse such testing or allow testing but have the samples and test results destroyed.

This has been on the books since 2003, so I'm not sure how this woman missed the info.

Interesting. I wonder how she did miss it. Maybe her doctors didn't inform her. I know that when I was pregnant I was given a packet of information & that was it. No one went over it with me. No one discussed it with me or sat down to answer my questions. When I called the doctors office to ask question about pre-screening they asked, didn't you get the packet? My dr did call me back & talk to me at length about my options. I was fortunate that he took the time. I guess not all doctors are as proactive when it comes to educating their patients. Just another reason we as patients need to be our own advocates.

I will add that I never did know about the newborn screening. I honestly thought that they just got the APGAR. I'm diabetic so DD had her sugar tested when born. They did that a few times. They never mentioned any other tests they where performing. Well except the hearing. Which I was there for.

Love ya, Meg, but this is a BS argument. I hate the idea that people have to be spoonfed all of their information. If it was given to you, you were informed, whether someone walked you through the package they already gave you or not. I, personally, am always irritated to tears when someone hands me written material and then reads it to me to make sure I'm not too stupid to understand it.

Plus, I've got zero problem with DNA storage. There are a lot of dead and missing kids that might have been brought home or at least identified if the authorities had their DNA.

MegGary · July 2010

LoriFalce:
MegGary:
ToledoDeux:
MegGary:

There was this story on cnn.com awhile back.

Here's the link: https://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/02/04/baby.dna.government/index.html?hpt=Sbin

I'm all for pre-screening. I think it's highly important. What I don't care for is that the Gov't can & does, according to this article & the supporting website, store our babies DNA indefinitely. Also the DNA is stored with our children's name's attached to it. That concerns me.

What also bothers me is that they don't tell parents that they are doing these tests. Why? Why not just be honest & up front? They tell us that they are testing our babies hearing when they are born. Why not these tests? Thats what bothers me about it all.

Would any of this make me opt out of newborn screening? No it wouldn't. The need for my child's well-being outweighs the risk of what the answers to those questions are.

I live in MN (same as the woman in that article) and was notified about the screening before each of my children's births. It is state law that parents be notified about the testing and retaining of testing material, and that parents have the right to refuse such testing or allow testing but have the samples and test results destroyed.

This has been on the books since 2003, so I'm not sure how this woman missed the info.

Interesting. I wonder how she did miss it. Maybe her doctors didn't inform her. I know that when I was pregnant I was given a packet of information & that was it. No one went over it with me. No one discussed it with me or sat down to answer my questions. When I called the doctors office to ask question about pre-screening they asked, didn't you get the packet? My dr did call me back & talk to me at length about my options. I was fortunate that he took the time. I guess not all doctors are as proactive when it comes to educating their patients. Just another reason we as patients need to be our own advocates.

I will add that I never did know about the newborn screening. I honestly thought that they just got the APGAR. I'm diabetic so DD had her sugar tested when born. They did that a few times. They never mentioned any other tests they where performing. Well except the hearing. Which I was there for.

Love ya, Meg, but this is a BS argument. I hate the idea that people have to be spoonfed all of their information. If it was given to you, you were informed, whether someone walked you through the package they already gave you or not. I, personally, am always irritated to tears when someone hands me written material and then reads it to me to make sure I'm not too stupid to understand it.

Plus, I've got zero problem with DNA storage. There are a lot of dead and missing kids that might have been brought home or at least identified if the authorities had their DNA.

My point is having a doctor or nurse or PA talk with me & answer my questions would be more useful than me playing Dr. Google. I appreciate that thats how you feel about getting written material. I would just like the option of getting questions answered if I have them.

Want a personalized experience?

Did anyone opt out of a Newborn Screening?

Re: Did anyone opt out of a Newborn Screening?

Choose Another Board

Search Boards