Correct. I don't get it. My kids have had concerns of rare disorders, as have I. Luckily none have been debilitating. We asked for more information and saught the tests and treatments available. If that wasn't working we'd keep looking and asking for referrals. I've had doctors recommend groups for issues in the past, so I don't see why that would be a sticking point. There is a degree of personal responsibility here as well. Again, I fully support getting more information to patients, as I've said throughout the entire conversation. I'm just not sure what kind of changes or requirements of doctors could be realistically implemented.
I guess they could, but I've never had a doctor relay information to me in that way. They always give a range of possibilities, and let the patient know the worst case scenario. That's the information I would want if there was a problem with one of our pregnancies. Then we'd go from there.
No. They find these things out through testing. DNA and Chromosomes. The markers tell the story. When my wife was pregnant the doctor found markers for a certain very rare birth defect that would have basically meant my son would not have survived long out of the womb. We were open if that was the case to the idea of abortion. It was not what we wanted, but if the situation dictated it, we were opened to the possibility of having to do that and it tore us up. We found out when we were visiting relatives in California. Our doctor called us down there and was relaying information as he had it. There were other results we were waiting for that could confirm it. We waited, crying and holding each other. Luckily though, it turned out something like one of us had the marker, but the other did not, and he didn't have the defect. We got the call and were very relieved. Sometimes doctors jump the gun and give out possibilities before all the facts are in. They should probably wait, but they are just relaying the facts as they become available.
Can someone tell me plainly why this conversation is happening in the abortion rights thread if it doesn't have anything to do with anyone's stance on abortion rights? To bring it around: Yes, there is a genre of doctor who really really likes eugenics, and will suggest abortion based on a fear mongering worst-case scenario. Yes, abortion should be legal and accessible to all for any reason. As soon as they find genetic markers for being trans, these doctors will definitely recommend aborting trans fetuses. That doesn't make abortion wrong. Ban eugenicist doctors, not abortions.
That's how they came across my son's possible defect. They arent working out of 50 year old text books. Medicine is continuously updated.
My heart surgeons are pretty open about how much educated guessing goes on in their profession....they can only give you their best educated assumption in most cases and usually go into treating a patient with a plan b, plan c, etc.....these days doctors have learned to pretty much stay non committal about results but focus on best possibilities. Law suits have changed a lot in the way they talk to patients pretty much. When going in for cardio ablation surgery they told me what percentage of success they had as well as what the chance of failure would be. They can only go by the available data and medical journals they keep up with.
If there is newer information the doctor will have better access to, or the means to find out about it than we do. So you get as much info as you can and make your decision from there. Again, much of this comes down to having a doctor you trust. And expanding access to healthcare so people aren't restricted in their choices would be the best solution there.
This is where SPC has a big point: doctors are *supposed to* keep updated on techniques and knowledge in their field of specialty, but many of them slack off on that, or ignore it after learning it, preferring their gut instincts and experience over new medical knowledge. Anti-intellectualism is a disease even doctors suffer from.
Be glad to get a beer. I can't say they test for everything. I do know they did a variety of different tests for my unborn son, looking for markers for several defects/disorders. That's how they came across a marker for one. Luckily we both didn't have the marker and the gene was recessive or something and he didn't have it. But, maybe I just had a good doctor or something.
I think due to lawsuits doctors are going to purposefully be vague about specific diagnosis and instead of going on a limb...suggest you get second or third opinions on special cases. If they get it wrong, it can come back to ruin their careers. It's a problem and many doctors would like TORT reform to allow them more freedom to follow their instincts without fear of retribution. As it stands many have their hands tied when it comes to diagnosing medical issues. Lots of...maybe...we'll see...we can try this...but the patient will be the one making a choice these days...not the doc
I'm not sure how this has anything to do with my position. I've never had a doctor refuse to help me find information about something. I've never heard of a doctor doing this. I'm pretty sure there would be grounds for a lawsuit here. My co-worker was directed to Washington DC for his kid's condition. I don't support doctors giving out misinformation, and I fully support an easily accessable database of all known medical conditions and treatments. As long as there are no delays mandated for further information or examinations. A woman should be fully within her rights to terminate any pregnancy for any reason. And doctors should be generally protected in prescribing and performing the procedures.
You'll pay for that one. One stipulation @Chris Craig, we can't go to Acropolis. That is reserved for @ABM
