How about Newborn DNA collection?

topic posted Fri, July 11, 2008 - 7:18 PM by  MerryMarie :D
I know that we are all concerned at the AMA's recent statement about home birthing...
But Newborn DNA Collection is legislation that HAS BEEN passed already...


**Described as a "national contingency plan" the justification for the new law S. 1858, known as The Newborn Screening Saves Lives Act of 2007, is that it represents preparation for any sort of "public health emergency."

The bill states that the federal government should "continue to carry out, coordinate, and expand research in newborn screening" and "maintain a central clearinghouse of current information on newborn screening… ensuring that the clearinghouse is available on the Internet and is updated at least quarterly".

Sections of the bill also make it clear that DNA may be used in genetic experiments and tests. **

www.infowars.com/

This is scarier to me than the AMA trying to rattle the cages of CNM's and Insurance Companies...
Google it, there isn't too much exposure on this new "law"... hhmmmm? I wonder why that is?
posted by:
MerryMarie :D
Rochester
  • Re: How about Newborn DNA collection?

    Thu, July 31, 2008 - 3:51 PM
    Uh..I thnk there is an option to deny this. we are and I have told my midwife I dont want any newborn screenign test.

    this is dispicable!
    • Re: How about Newborn DNA collection?

      Thu, July 31, 2008 - 6:28 PM
      I am not into it either... but in my experience with pediatricians, they love to
      present things to parents as tho "it must be done!!" when parents actually have a
      choice... i.e. the Flu and Varicilla vaccines, circumcisions, etc. There hasn't
      been a lot of coverage on this, to my knowledge, and in so I'm wondering how
      many new parents aren't being told they don't have to do the screening...
      • Re: How about Newborn DNA collection?

        Fri, August 1, 2008 - 11:20 AM
        i'm sure they are not being given the option. even my midwife said something to the effect that this is a state-manadated thing, making it sound so official. i said, tell me what to do to not have this done. she is printing the forms for me to sign to waive it.

        so tired of being harangued into conforming with others' standards, particularly that of government funded agencies.

        you have to be SO vigilant to keep the monkeys off your back! :)
        • Re: How about Newborn DNA collection?

          Mon, August 4, 2008 - 6:48 AM
          This came up a little while ago so forgive me if i'm sketchy on the details, but i remember it as the same newborn screening for inherited blood and metabolic disorders that's been around for years.

          The particular diseases they test for are all ones that the outcome can be treated, for early on, in order to make a difference- such as PKU. I'm not sure i'd call testing for blood dyscrasias and such "dna testing". I mean, technically anytime you take a blood sample and test it (such as blood typing) you're "testing dna"
          • Re: How about Newborn DNA collection?

            Mon, August 4, 2008 - 7:46 AM
            ahhh yes, but this is a bit different... to my understanding this collection of blood is to be "analyzed", kept and
            stored in a "data bank" under the guise of being of use to researchers in the future...
            really, it seems to me, this is a way for anyone to keep dna info about my child in a "data bank"
            to be used in any way (it would be out of my control at that point) in the future...
            that could be for or against my child... I'd rather my child had nothing to do with it...
            • Re: How about Newborn DNA collection?

              Fri, August 8, 2008 - 12:51 PM
              As Jessica mentioned, this did come up recently. As before I'd urge you to look at the source of this information. It appears to be much more of a fear-mongering than fact-based source.

              If a person does not want to participate in government-funded newborn screens, I would still hope they would seek out a newborn screening through a private company. Finding and appropriate treating these diseases is way too important
              • Re: How about Newborn DNA collection?

                Sun, August 10, 2008 - 9:14 AM
                fear mongering?
                we're given no idea what the government's purposes may be for gathering, retaining and perhaps analyzing the data from every single newborn, yet we can imagine a relatively broad spectrum of ways that such a database could possibly be abused.
                this ain't merely newborn screening, or they could dispose of the data as soon as any treatable newborn diseases were either detected or ruled out.
                even if we ignore the potentials for abuse and only raise the question from a taxpayer cost/benefit perspective, what acceptable purpose is there for retaining this data?
                • Re: How about Newborn DNA collection?

                  Sun, August 10, 2008 - 2:23 PM
                  Yes, very much sticking by my statement about fear mongering. Alex Jones is not a source I find trustworthy.

                  Have you read through the text of the actual Act (not the infowars article)? Can you find the part that addresses this "DNA database"? I'm no expert at reading government documents, but I've gone through the extire Act and tried to find these references and I can't. What I see is an act designed to help public health by identifying newborns with genetic diseases and getting these newborns appropriate treatment when possible. And I see that as a good thing.

                  Here is the text of the Act from the Library of Congress:
                  thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D
                  • This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.

                    Re: How about Newborn DNA collection?

                    Sun, August 10, 2008 - 6:28 PM
                    yes, I have read the bill... I don't like to post statements without having read them first...

                    www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd

                    There are a few places in this bill that very loosely state the intention
                    "to establish and maintain a central clearinghouse of current information on newborn screening"...

                    Because of these open-ended statements, it would be very easy to establish a database of DNA
                    collections not at all suspected by the public... and then used by the government for very different
                    reasons... I'm sorry, but I just don't feel comfortable with the Government hanging onto my child's DNA
                    "for future research expansion"... that's just my opinion...

                    This all coincides at a time when the government is wanting to use radio frequency identification tags
                    in ID's and has already started using technology to store personal information without the publics
                    awareness or consent... Penn started issuing new Driver's Licenses this year- not only do they have
                    a chip in them, when having a picture taken at the DMV the camera is also measuring your facial
                    features and storing this info... and the Dept of Motor Vehicles within the state of Pennsylvania decided
                    to start doing this WITHOUT the proper legislature procedure... i.e. NO ONE VOTED and most of the
                    public has no awareness of what is going on when they go to have a license renewed or receive
                    one for the first time...

                    For these reasons I would very much like to make sure that I protect my children as much as possible...
                    of course I will make sure that they are healthy as well... I understand your reasons for not trusting Alex Jones,
                    but never the less, with all that's going on in the world, I have to wonder at subjects like this...
                    • Re: How about Newborn DNA collection?

                      Mon, August 18, 2008 - 1:36 PM
                      Thank you for the thoughtful response. I can see how you could interpret the wording in that way. I guess my concerns lie in the fear that people will hear about this controversy and decide to decline newborn screening all together.
                      • Re: How about Newborn DNA collection?

                        Mon, August 18, 2008 - 5:36 PM
                        well, quite honestly I ID decline newborn screenng (almost) altogether, and I have no regrets.


                        fourteen eyars ago when my baby was born, there was no swabbing for sampoles; it was done by heelstick. my baby was born pretty oninterventively at home with a midwife (I;d go even less medical had I the birth to do over, but thatls 'cuz I;ve become pretty hardcore!)

                        ayway, I agreed to the four-part newborn screen they do in California where we live, and I rgretted it as soon as they took my peacefully sleeping 6 day old infant baby who had nver been hurt medically (or otherwise) in any way and stuck her heel to get a blood sample. it didn;t flow freely and they kept squeezing her ankle with a lab aide saying, almost shouting, "you have to BKLEED, come on bab!" sdhe screamed and screamed and I burst into tears and knew I ahd betrayed my own principles.

                        I knew it was highly unlikely that she had any of the genetic diseases for which they were screening...their incidence ranged from one in 1600 to 1 in over 4000 if memory serves me right...and they are all autosomal recessives, I believe, which means that while it;s POSSIBEL that they have been silently heterozygous for generations, unlss there is some past history on noth sides of the family of oneof these diseases...pretty unlikely. and frankly I trust my intuition at this point (I also ahve a fair amount of ehalth training) to feel that if I really was concerned about something being wrong, it would be for good reason, and in the absence of that...why torture my baby and myself?


                        I had the tests done not so much ebcause I thought I "Should" for any medical reason, but because after this great homeborth, I;d brought my baby in to see a doctor when she;d had some trouble with breastfeeding and got a bot dehyfrated, and I as paranoid enough (which is a form of overriding one;s inttution,r eally) to think the hospital was going to hassle me as an "alternative" type mother anyway who;d insisted on homebirth that I;d better comply wioth their regualtions. Ido have a fear of hospital social workers and otehr busybodies thinking they are doing the right thing by contacting CHIld Protective Services when someone deviates from their understanding of proper new parent behaviorm, whether it's eclineing prenatal testing and hospital birth, which I did, or using botanical remedies.

                        anyway, it was a traumatic excpedriece for me but it taught me a lot about where my values are really at, and I made a priomise to myself and my baby never to subject ehr to that kind o paion unless I felt there was a really good reason. (e.g., that her life or well being was in danger if I didn;t.) this didn;t qualify.

                        so the doctor called me back a week later to say that they had vlurred the blood test and it couldn;t be read well and they wanted to repeat it. it made me nervous to stand up to her, but I declined. I told the doctor I had attended public health grad school and was planning to continue (all true) and that I ken w it was another way of looking at things, but I felt pretty satisfied that my child was not in danger of any of those genetic diseases, and besides I feel that much of our insistence on these tests is our fear of people with developmental delays, and that I;d been a teacher and counselor and family member of developmentally delayed chid;lren and adults and I didn;t see their existence as a tragedy to eb avoided at all costs - in fact they wre my friends (and in one case my cousin.) the physician chewed me out a little, but I stood my ground.

                        every state seem to have slightly different tests they run or slightly differnt laws concerning how they are done, whioch to me makes me feel their "necessity" is open to discussion since not every public health department agrees that they are all needed!

                        a week or two later I had a tak with the haed lab technician, a really kindly woman who heard me out and said that Iw as clearly a thinking person, that she was a mother of three children ehrself, and that while I was ":more alternative" inher words than she, she respected my reight to make the choices I considered best for my child and that she understood why I would not want the procedure repeated. since there is no birthing facility at the branch of our HMP where I got my care, they are not that familair with working on newborns and maybe they need a little more sensitivity to how families feel pressured, or not.

                        I'm not telling anyone NOT to screen their babies, but sometimes I tihnk wel;ve gone overboard with all our tests in this generation.

Recent topics in "Home Birth"