The “lung float” test claims to help determine if a baby was born alive or dead, but many medical examiners say it’s too unreliable. Yet the test is still being used to bring murder charges — and get convictions.
e; added “in Multiple U.S. States” to the title
In the US. Let’s please clarify these things in the title
Fair enough, I copied the title from the article without really thinking about it but that’s a perfectly reasonable request
How horrifying to have your wanted, stillborn child cut open like a high school science experiment. And what about infants who were able to take a breath before dying shortly after birth?
I think it’s good practice to carry out an autopsy. But boiling it down to a single piece of evidence which doesn’t proof neither if the baby was or wasn’t stillborn is insane. On top of that even if it proofed that the child was stillborn or not, it still doesn’t proof that the child was subject to murder.
Either the article is leaving out specific details relevant for the case to enrage the reader or the justice system is reeeally shit.
Spoilers: It’s both.
The test has been used in at least 11 cases where women were charged criminally since 2013 and has helped put nine of them behind bars,
ProPublica found only 11 cases where lung float tests had been performed in a 10-year period.
ProPublica then contacted the 12 largest medical examination offices and discovered that only two actually used the test at all, and none of them considered the results definitive proof of live birth.
Note that they were aware of which offices had performed the 11 tests they were aware of, and yet they could not find anyone willing to “[express] full-throated support for the test.”
This article is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
ProPublica then contacted the 12 medical examination offices and discovered that only two actually used the test at all, and none of them considered the results definitive proof of live birth.
Source?
Note that they were aware of which offices had performed the 11 tests they were aware of, and yet they could not find anyone willing to “[express] full-throated support for the test.”
This is the full quote. “None of the 12 largest offices by jurisdiction expressed full-throated support for the test.” They didn’t state that the 12 largest offices were the ones who performed the tests. What you posted was taken out of context and given new context.
Here’s the surrounding context to give more insight. Nowhere did they state that these 12 offices who didn’t express support for the test are the ones who did the test.
" Cook County, home to Chicago, pathologists use it, but give more weight to “more reliable methods” including X-rays, microscopic examinations and autopsy findings to determine whether a birth was live or still. Others, like the Virginia Office of the Chief Medical Examiner, said the test may be useful only if a baby was not born into a toilet, CPR was not performed and decomposition was not present. None of the 12 largest offices by jurisdiction expressed full-throated support for the test.
And while the national organization that represents medical examiners said that it doesn’t have an official stance on the lung float test, it said it “strongly advocates using scientifically validated and evidence-based practices in forensic pathology.” The National Association of Medical Examiners called the lung float test “a single, dated test” that has not been subjected to the organization’s rigorous evaluation process."
Absolutely disgusting. And, sadly, not surprising.
