In this publication; 332 parents completed the questionnaire, some had prenatal diagnosis and others postnatal. Those with prenatal diagnosis may or may not have had access to abortion services, but if they did, they had obviously chosen not to terminate because the study only included parents of infants who had been born alive.
About half of the parents had opted for palliative care and a quarter for limited medical care after birth, the remaining 25% had wanted full intervention. Interestingly, survival duration was not much different between these families.
One of their important findings was that they asked parents if they regretted their choices regarding the extent of medical intervention. The parents who regretted their choices were overwhelmingly those who chose to limit the medical interventions to comfort care only, or less than full intervention.
Also of note the children did show signs of developmental progress, and all were able to communicate with their parents at some level.
The parents report overwhelmingly, that the experience of living with these children had made a positive contribution to their family life, irrespective of the length of their lives, and even though it had created substantial financial costs. They also report their child as being a happy child.
What is most distressing is how negative the families’ interactions with healthcare providers were. Although 2/3 of the families did meet at least one provider who was helpful; most had received misinformation, and many of those who chose to have active care felt that they were judged negatively by providers for daring to make that decision. Providers also often referred to their baby in de-humanising terms, calling their baby ‘it’ or ‘a T18’. They recount interactions with providers who never learnt their baby’s name, instead referring to the child by their diagnosis.
This study points out the uniqueness of each of these children and the heterogeneity of condition and survival. The emphasize that we cannot be definite about the duration of survival or the capacities of an individual.
They conclude: Parents who engage with parental support groups may discover an alternative, positive, description about children with T13-18.
I conclude; we need to rethink how we present diagnoses of serious conditions to parents.
I must admit to an enhanced interest in this publication, I know Barb Farlow personally, she contacted Annie and me a few years ago, after her family had a distressing interaction with healthcare providers. Her own daughter was born with trisomy 13 and eventually died after a re-admission, when a do not resuscitate order was placed in her baby’s chart without her knowledge or consent (or that of her husband; she has written about the experience
here and
here and
here). Interacting with Barb and then going on to review the websites, youtube videos and personal stories of families who had a child with one or other of these trisomies has really enhanced my understanding of how some families with such children react. One very touching video, which has become quite well known, is
99 balloons, another is
here. I encourage anyone who has to care for families whose children have severe impairments to spend some time listening to the parent stories, the videos and the websites.
So here are some guidelines to use when talking with parents who have received a diagnosis, prenatal or postnatal, guidelines that you could develop as a result of these families’ reports of their experiences:
1. Don’t say that this is ‘incompatible with life’ or ‘lethal’; anyone can go on the internet and find very quickly that you lied to them.
2. Don’t say that if they survive ‘they will live a life of suffering’, parents do think that their child had more pain than others, but they also had many positive times, and their overall evaluation was positive.
3. Human beings are not vegetables. These children are conscious and interact, even if at very limited levels. Carrots don’t.
4. Don’t predict marital disharmony, or family breakdown. You can’t see the future, there is no evidence at all that this occurs more when a family has a baby with severe impairments, and indeed in this admittedly biased sample the divorce rate was far lower than the US or Canadian average.
4. Families find meaning in the lives of their children. Whether those lives are unimpaired or lived with severe impairments. Whether they are very short or not.
5. Don’t suggest that the child is replaceable. Sometimes parents will bring up the idea that they can have another child, that is fine if they do so, but for you to suggest it really shows that you think this child is worthless.
6. Don’t say that there is nothing you can do for them. There is a lot you can do. Empathy and a positive attitude can be a great help. Finding resources, respite care, enabling appropriate medical care, these are all things that you can do for them.
7. Be very explicit about medical decision making, come to an agreement about the limits of medical interventions (if you can’t, then find them another doctor who can); and be open to changing the plan as time goes on.
8. Refer to the child by name if there is a name. (Annie has often recounted to me that when she sees parents antenatally with a serious diagnosis she will ask them what the baby’s name is. They often become teary and tell her it is the first time anyone has recognized their fetus as being a real potential human being, it is one of the many things she has taught me.)
9. Above all recognize that these babies are human beings who will be loved, who will be cared for, who will leave a positive mark on their families, and who deserve respect.
