Tuesday, September 30, 2008

More Amnio Weirdness from Sarah Palin

Several readers have commented or written to me in email about the most recent revelations from Gov. Palin - that she had her amniocentesis done at 13 weeks. I think this is more spin.

No one should lose sight of JUST HOW MUCH of this woman's story does not make sense. I covered this to a certain extent in the blog post I did some days ago about amniocentesis, but I had not heard the "thirteen weeks" at that point. I thought she had had it done in December, but now frankly I can't remember if I read that somewhere or if I just assumed it, based on the timetable of the pregnancy and knowing the typical time to do it.

The reason to do it earlier (as early as thirteen weeks instead of the more standard sixteen to eighteen), would be to allow someone who is already worried about something (usually something more like a family linked genetic disorder) and knows that they will abort in the face of certain results to get those results earlier. But it is both more dangerous and less reliable at this point in pregnancy.

Most pro-life women choose to forgo the test. Those few who do choose to do it will prefer to have it done later rather than sooner, when it's both safer and more likely to give accurate results.

Let me give you my read on this. It's yet another fable. We are definitely rewriting the whole story in an attempt to make sure there are no inconsistencies. (However, when you can't remember what you said six months ago, you get into trouble.)

Palin's failure to reveal her pregnancy until seven months is being explained by her needing to adjust to the Down's diagnosis and her concerns that the people of Alaska would have that the governor would not be able to do the job. And you know, the idea that she might have waited until four, or even five months to make a public announcment, I can buy that. But to not tell anyone in her family? Come on.

If she had had amnio at the regular time (around 17 weeks, say, with a ten day wait for results) and had known she was pregnant at a normal time (say around 6 weeks after conception - so eight weeks of pregnancy) this leaves a time frame of more than two months, before she knew about the Down's diagnosis, when she should have known she was pregnant but told no one! We are to believe she did not tell her MOTHER during this time? Her mother that she is supposedly close to who watches her kids all the time? That she had not a single close friend with whom she shared the "happy news?"

I think this is one reason that the amnio is now being "shifted" to the earlier time frame, to account for this two and half month period during which she told no one she was pregnant, not even her parents. But they may have opened a bigger can of worms, because in fact there is NO believable reason for a pro-life woman who would not choose to terminate under any circumstances to have an amnio that early.


Paula said...

The only thing that has made me doubt that Bristol is the mother of Trig is that he has Down Syndrome. The odds of a 17 year old conceiving a Down Syndrome baby are 1/1400. The odds for a 44 year old are 1/35. The odds are 40 to 1- which leads me to this.

They shipped Bristol off in order to conceal her pregnancy. They waited as long as possible (until her 7th month) to announce that Sarah was pregnant, so she wouldn't be under scrutiny. Soon after that she began wearing her pregnancy suit. However, prior to announcing "her" pregnancy, Sarah and the first dude realized that everyone in Wasilla knew that Bristol was pregnant. They had to come up with some "proof" that it couldn't be Bristol's baby. Hence the Downs story.

I read in an interview (which I will post when I find it) that Sarah said Trig doesn't exhibit the facial features normally present in a Down Syndrome baby. I'd like to know what the experts think about his facial features.
Something tells me that Trig is going to be miraculously cured.

Audrey said...

Another factor is that I believe that this baby DID come early by about 5 weeks. I think Gov. Palin had intended to have 4-5 more weeks to "cement" the pregnancy in people's minds. And she lost that.

Anonymous said...

That's the odds of conceiving a Down Syndrome baby IF you conceive a baby. On the other hand, the odds of a 17 year old conceiving a baby are >13 times greater than the odds of a 44 year old conceiving a baby. That drops the overall odds to 3-to-1.

Meg, Jerry Angela and Joshua said...

People, come on, when a woman is pregnant, and gets some "scary" news or something, the last thing you want to do is go back to everyone you shared the happy news with, that the baby had died. I just went through that in April 2008. I told everyone I was expecting baby 3, a few weeks later, it was all gone. So even keeping it from family is what some women choose to do. As hard as it may be for you to understand, that is the case.
My daughter also does not have many of the features that one typically sees with Down syndrome. In fact, we denied an amnio because the level 2 ultrasound did not find ANY markers. So it is possible. Many experts have told me that. What angers me is that people think all Down syndrome people look the same, act the same and do everything the same. That is not the case. There are very high functioning Down syndrome people, and others who are not, my daughter also has Autism, and that has been, more often than not, dismissed and labeled as part of the Down syndrome, when research shows it can exist.
AND many women do not "show" until very late in the pregnancy, even at 7 months. If you are fit and trim, you would not show for awhile, and it depends on how the baby is lying inside the womb.