False negative with Maternit21?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My OB suggested the Panorama test over MaterniT21 because he said MaterniT21 has already had 11 false negatives. It's not a lot, but it is still 11.

11 out of how many?
If it is 11 out of 11, it is terrible, but 11 out of 1000000000, it's excellent.

[Anonymous]

Even if they now say either 'positive' or 'negative', it does not change the fact that there is statistic and probability behind it, and someone decided what probability was going to be the cut off to say positive or negative for this or that.

I am getting CVS regardless of any screening results, just like I did with DC1. With DC1, I had CVS scheduled before I had the screening results (insurance would pay regardless). And even CVS in not 100% sure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[.

The doctor informed PP of the soft markers and it's crap to say that the doctor should have directed the PP to get an amnio. It's not a doctor's call to make, it's the parent's. Also, it's not a Down syndrome baby, it's a baby that has Down Syndrome. Way to dehumanize a baby.

oh please. does calling a baby a female baby, a reflux baby, a white baby, a colic baby, etc dehumanize it? no, it doesn't. get over yourself.

the parents should sue for malpractice for the simple fact that it *was* (it appears they didn't receive proper genetic counseling and in fact received completely faulty information) and they *will* get money for their baby which they *will* need.

I agree with the poster you're quoting. She's referring to people first language. The other examples you cited do not carry the stigma that Down Syndrome does, but yes describing a person by their medical condition is dehumanizing.
http://www.disabilityisnatural.com/explore/people-first-language

[Anonymous]

It uses fewer words. It is efficient. I say crazy batshit insane stuff like "my speech delayed toddler." And yes, it does indicate the primary topic of conversation. It's not dehumanizing to make a disability the primary topic. It is indeed what we are discussing here. I read this thread for more information regarding the error rate. Even though it is anecdotal it is still helpful to me. Language police aren't.

[Anonymous]

I don't think people are being "language police." Listen, the disability community is clear that everyone should use people first language i.e. baby with DS, not DS baby. Obviously, the people on this thread who didn't use people first language clearly don't mean any disrespect, but lets just call this a teaching moment and now everyone knows to use people first language when discussing disabilities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It uses fewer words. It is efficient. I say crazy batshit insane stuff like "my speech delayed toddler." And yes, it does indicate the primary topic of conversation. It's not dehumanizing to make a disability the primary topic. It is indeed what we are discussing here. I read this thread for more information regarding the error rate. Even though it is anecdotal it is still helpful to me. Language police aren't.

Why would you continue to use language that people have explained is offensive? It appears you are wanting to remain willfully ignorant.

[Anonymous]

I recently had a false negative with maternit21, my anatomy scan showed my baby to have multiple abnormalities despite my negative results from maternit21. I was shocked and angry to be mislead.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I recently had a false negative with maternit21, my anatomy scan showed my baby to have multiple abnormalities despite my negative results from maternit21. I was shocked and angry to be mislead.

Sorry to hear What happened?