Sarah Palin and the Pediatric Specialist: Another Conversation

4/22/2011

Holding my son in the neonatal intensive care nursery at one month. The orange flag in the background is the "crash cart."

This story of the birth of Trig Palin has intrigued me for the reasons I have stated in earlier posts. I had a high-risk pregnancy and a complicated delivery by a very careful and skilled surgeon (OB) in an urban hospital a mile from the children’s hospital where my son lived for the first few months of his life. I’ve written extensively about our experiences.

On the other hand, there is no clear, consistent account of Sarah Palin’s putative pregnancy and Trig Palin’s birth, while there is a lot of speculation about what was right, wrong, risky and/or foolish. Or true.

I spoke at length with a pediatric specialist who has worked in the field for 30 years, including Level 3 Neonatal Intensive Care Units. I was curious about his take on the stories and rumors. He spoke honestly, gently and without regard for what I or anyone else might want to hear.

Read his comments carefully. There is one section that some people might find difficult to read. It is blunt, but illustrative of how he knows all that he knows about cardiac anomalies in Down syndrome children.

I am presenting this informally. Take away from this conversation what you will. And if you have follow up questions that are reasonable for me to ask him, I’d be glad to.

On delivering babies early:

There’s a lot going on in the OB and medical safety literature right now about pushing back from this culture of “I’m gonna have my kid when I’m gonna have my kid”, rather than “I’m gonna have my kid when he’s ready”.

Your OB was ahead of the game, or it was far enough back in years. No more “let’s time our delivery because this is good for me, or because I want my kid born on 1/1/11”. Clearly kids who are born prematurely have significant issues globally, even though that doesn’t mean every single one does. On average kids who are born early have more problems - even if that’s at 37 or 38 weeks. So there’s been increasing pushback on this culture of “I want it done my way.”

Inducing a 44-year-old multipara woman carrying a 35-week Down syndrome fetus:

What could explain her being induced? Unless there was a problem with the fetus itself there would be no reason to do this. And I don’t know of anything related to Downs that would push you to go in that direction

Sarah Palin states she began leaking amniotic fluid in Dallas 24 hours before she delivered:

Leaking fluid is a relative indication that labor needs to be induced because of risk of infection. You don’t want that to go on for long period of time. The situation is more difficult than just putting the mother on bed rest. You can put her on antibiotics but that won’t prevent infection. And the fetus can be more severely impacted by that kind of infection. They might push to deliver because of that.

Flying 10 hours while leaking amniotic fluid:

That’s an issue. Why fly? If you’re leaking fluid you ought to go to the most reasonably near facility that can deal appropriately with your condition. Getting on an airplane when you might go into precipitous labor at any period of time seems unwise. If she’s leaking fluid she can go (into labor) anytime. Doesn’t have to leak for hours. And in an airplane you don’t have access to anything. Best of circumstances you have half an hour before the plane can be on the ground and that’s if you’re flying over an airport.

So why would she take that risk if she didn’t have to? In some sense it’s judgment call. If she wasn’t who she was would anyone say anything about it? Anybody would want to deliver close to home. For her, privacy invasion would be more likely at an out of town hospital. Is there risk? Yes, but relative to a delivery in rural Alaska?

If not leaking fluid, why induce at 35 weeks:
If Palin wasn’t leaking fluid? Unless there was something going on with fetus you’re not aware of, it’s probably not a good idea to induce labor.

Delivering in small hospital without NICU:

But by itself, this is not a problem, no. Downs babies may have things wrong with them, but as I recall there’s not really anything that you would expect to cause an immediate risk to health. So they may have heart defects and that sort of thing. But they tend to be relatively stable during first month of life.

Emergencies certainly happen and a diagnosis might not be made in advance. . But if someone just walked into hospital to deliver, it might be safer for them to deliver there than transport the mom - especially in a place like Alaska where transport can be hit-or-miss anywhere. You may say that you’re going to move them because of some health issue. But you may find that risk of transportation is more than risk of delivering.

But in terms of planning ahead to deliver this way, does it reach the level of being egregious? That would be hard to say without having a lot more information. The circumstances all seem kind of strange. If you’re concerned about the kid why do you deliver where the kid won’t have access to the appropriate level of care? And if kid is not having problems why are you delivering at all?

Now if you have all the resources of a possible candidate for the Vice Presidential nominee of the Republican party, you might want to go farther. People are funny. They don’t always make rational choices. Quite possible she simply wanted to be closer to home rather than in some place where she would be covered by media all the time.

Clearly the kid didn’t have problems. So did she put the kid at more risk by doing what she did? Possibly. But the difference would have been at the margin at best. Any normal hospital with routine OB work would be fine. You wouldn’t want to go to a place that doesn’t have an OB service or delivered one baby a week. But a place that was set up to do things was probably fine.

Delivery of a Ds baby by a Family Practitioner:

When you live in an urban area, you’re not used to this. But there are a lot a places where family practitioners do most of the deliveries. And having a Board Cert OB available is not necessarily easy. I was delivered by my family practitioner.

Down syndrome heart defects at birth:

They can have heart defects but they are the type of defects that don’t usually require emergency intervention. They need to be assessed and potentially followed but that doesn’t mean they have to have a pediatric cardiologist waiting for them.

The way things work now, there are ultrasounds that are the size of your iPhone, so if you have a technician who knows what they are doing or can work with a cardiologist over the phone, they wouldn’t even necessarily have to be in the same state. That’s not 4 or 5 years ago, but now. If they had a responsibly competent, well-trained technician it might very well be able to do the echo on site and just transmit it to whomever to evaluate. If the quality was bad or something was question, they might call the kid in and repeat it on site.

Ds heart defects in general:

Thirty-five years ago it was the pioneering days of pediatric cardiac surgery. They did a lot of heart surgery on Downs kids for 2 reasons: At the time they didn’t consider it a loss if they lost the kids. And because it was hard to kill them. They survived. In some sense they were hardy. The surgeons were experimenting at the time. That’s one of the favorite aphorisms of a pediatric cardiac surgeon at the time: He’d lose a kid on the table, and look at the cardiac surgery Fellow and say, “it was all experimental anyway” and walk away. That’s a long time ago. But that’s the way it was. The survival rates seemed to be higher for the Downs kids than the other kids with heart problems. So having a Downs kid in a regional hospital with a sort of normal ability for OB and routine nursery care is probably not that out of the question.

Taking a 3-day-old newborn to work:

I would say if the kid was born at 40 weeks and was otherwise normal, I still wouldn’t take him to work. I find it crazy when I walk into Safeway and see a kid who’s a couple of weeks old at best out with in public exposed to who-knows-who with who-knows-what potentially infectious respiratory problems. Why would you do that if you had a choice? It seems showy.

I’m constantly telling people the most dangerous place for your kid is the back seat of your car. If there is no one available to take the kid at home and you had to go to work, that’s one thing. But how many moms with newborns have to make that choice in the first place? You going to go Walmart to work with the kid and have them under the cash register? No, people find someone to leave the baby home with.

It’s a different society up there in Alaska. It’s a frontier mentality. And people do things that we would consider out of place down here but might not be up there.

Feeding issues:

Downs kids tend to be pudgy. If they’re preemies, if they’re developmentally at 35 weeks, they may have some problems feeding. But feeding is variable. It’s not related to the Downs but to the gestational age. The kids born at that age in the nursery are there mostly because they don’t feed well and they want to make sure they are feeding enough and gaining weight. Some quite conceivably go home that day.

Photo of Trig seemingly with a nasal canula for oxygen:

He may have had an RSV infection or bronchiolitis and needed extra oxygen. It makes you wonder what the source of the picture is. If they are on oxygen they are not at home. The other part of that is that some of the cardiac conditions, and I’m no expert, are in some sense oxygen sensitive. So that if you maintain your level of oxygenation, you prevent their circulation from screwing itself up. There are oxygen sensors in your circulatory system and blood vessels will expand or contract based on what they are seeing and maybe a little extra oxygen was to prevent an adverse reaction from happening. That’s before a heart defect is fixed.

Downs kids can have ventricular septal defects, and a lot of those are what are called muscular, and over time they functionally close if not anatomically close. And the atrial septal defects as well. There are two types of ASD’s and one closes spontaneously because it’s a physiologic opening, meaning it’s there to function during gestation so its supposed to be there. They don’t always close the way they are supposed to and they take time to seal. And if they seal you don’t have to do anything with them. So he may never have needed surgery.

The media:

If I were writing for the New York Times and I was the editor, I would say, it’s a waste of time, in that you can probably make something of this if you want to, but there’s really nothing of any great import here. If you’re working for People Magazine, then let’s throw this one out here and sell a few more copies.

There’s not much substance here. The kids doing okay now as far as we know, I think. So while the decisions may not have been 100% in line with conventional thinking, they weren’t so far off line that the kid has suffered any significant problems.

Risk:

There’s really not a whole lot to it. It’s a mom in the public eye trying to make decisions that seem appropriate to her. It’s easy to second guess. But I’m not sure a lot of other people would have done it differently, or she might have had she not been in public eye. Having other kids certainly would help in the sense that she would be more comfortable taking a kid home. She’s been there before. If she’s saying, “he’s my kid and I’m going to treat him as normal kid,” then why not?

This is within the bounds of normal. We have parents and patients all the time that do things different from what we recommend. But as long as they are not putting their kid at risk, there’s a limit to how much steering you can do. If I think a kid has cancer and I’ll push that. But if the lump has been there 6 months and hasn’t changed and mom isn’t concerned, then I’ll say ‘come back later’.

Trig and Trisomy G:

I don’t remember hearing that about Trisomy G. I remember a kid I knew when I was 10 years old who parents named Twig Snodgrass. I’m not joking. And of course there’s the famous Ima Hogg. Trig? Hmmm. So? We see a lot worse names than that. There was a baby named Meconium in the nursery. I’m not kidding. The mom liked the sound of the word. You know how psychotic parents can be.

Ruffled ear defect:

That kind of surgery isn’t going to get done by someone in the boondocks in Alaska. If the ear was crushed in the uterus it can look really weird and 4 or 5 months it can look perfectly normal. Kids heads look weird when they come out too, especially if there’s been a prolonged labor. And over time they straighten themselves out and look pretty good. How much of this is artifact from the picture itself? The lighting or shadows or who knows what. And if it looks like the opening of ear canal is farther forward? Is it the ear canal or a shadow?

An ear defect does not necessarily have to do with Downs.

Ethical quandary:

I find the woman distasteful to say the least. But there are more important things to worry about with her than this. There is no flag for me here. In a lot of ways she is a modern woman. And not in the sense that she is looking out for women’s rights but rather that she is making decisions for herself and family and the public be damned. If you have a question about it, that’s too bad.

As a doctor, I would have no ethical quandaries about this.

It just seems like people trying to make something out of, not necessarily nothing, but certainly something that wouldn’t be at all a question if she wasn’t who she was. Would Child Protective Services be looking for her because she got on an airplane? Probably not. When you’re in the public eye people will question anything you do. Obama has the same problem. No matter what he says or does, people will disagree. It has nothing do with him. It has to do with we want to make noise.

There are far worse things going on and people being far more abusive to their kids than this is anywhere near. So from the perspective of someone who has seen parents neglectful to the point of abusive, this is nothing. There are moms who have 5 or 6 kids in foster care and the next thing you know there’s another 30-week preemie in the nursery for the State to spend a million dollars on. There are good moms and other moms. And when do you tell a mom they can’t have another kid? It’s America and we don’t do that. It’ may not be in the kid’s best interest to be had by that mom. But the fundamental basis of America is liberty.

Downs and age:

Downs kids are far more likely in older parents. So, the chance that the teenager had a Downs baby? It’s possible but probably less than 5%. Teenagers might have more babies, but on the basis of the babies they have, how many have Downs? It’s much smaller.

A hoax:

She’s weird in some ways. But she’s not that weird. To do things like fake a pregnancy. Those kinds of people don’t get through a nomination process because there would be too many flags. Because it’s not that they do one thing that’s weird. There would be a history. There’s politically weird and then there’s outrageous behavior. Did she baptize her kids in local stream in middle of winter? Did she have the kid at home? No. Politically I don’t like her. But she’s not that weird.

melly

4/22/2011 01:32:17 am

You didn't ask him about flat bellies in third trimesters.

Glad this very vague and noncommittal guy is not my doc. I could pretty much run my own show, even lie to him, and get his blessing as long as I don't dip my baby in a cold stream.

Tracy

4/22/2011 02:08:16 am

Actually Doctor, she is exactly THAT weird.

Other OB doctors have weighed in on this issue and have been utterly appalled by Sarah Palin's reckless behavior.

mistah charley, ph.d. link

4/22/2011 02:10:39 am

Well, this is kind of anticlimactic. But maybe the informed judgment of your anonymous pediatric specialist is right - Sarah's baby-related behavior is not as EXTREMELY peculiar as it seems to us who hate and fear her. Her half-governorship would seem to put the nail in the coffin of any serious quest for higher office. And we're now on the third year of Obama's first term, after two terms of W., and to quote a Tom Petty song, "I can't decide which is worse."

Rationalist

4/22/2011 02:52:03 am

Doctors are hesitant to second guess each other's decisions. Fine. But this doctor seems to be operating under an assumption that Sarah Palin's activities on April 18th, 2008 were under a doctor's care. But according to Palin her doctor approved the flight home over the phone without ever physically checking Palin or the baby.

Would your doctor really have "no ethical quandaries" about encouraging a patient with as many risk factors as Palin claims she had at that time (Advance maternal age multi-para with two previous miscarriages, in late term pregnancy, suffering premature rupture of membranes while carrying a fetus with Down Syndrome with a diagnosed hole in his heart) to travel the way she did without any doctor evaluating her?

I find that very, very hard to believe.

Furthermore, I'm afraid that as a pediatric specialist this doctor is not qualified to determine that Sarah Palin is "not that weird."

Original Lee

4/22/2011 02:55:44 am

I agree with Rationalist. Everything he says sounds as if he is trying very hard not to question a colleague's judgment. It also sounds as if he's not adding the risks together, just answering exactly the question posed. What is weird about this story is the *cumulative* effect of all of her decisions. Each individually is a little off, but taken *together* the Reckless Ride really is ... reckless.

Rationalist

4/22/2011 02:59:46 am

Precisely, Original Lee.

I refer everyone to this post by Gryphen.

http://theimmoralminority.blogspot.com/2010/03/sarah-palin-pregnancy-what-are-odds.html

crystalwolfakcaligrl

4/22/2011 03:41:40 am

I appreciate a Doctor going on the record, but I think he missed the whole point, which is either Sarah Palin was Reckless passing up at least Two hospitals to have TriG in Palmer, AK, flying for over 10 hours, driving a hour away...? WTF? Also,too looking at it as a "Story" as in Fake story,see all the "holes" in this story IE: Fake pregnancy? I think if he hadn't know her name he would of been more "objective"?
I really agree with 1st commenter "Melly".
I wouldn't want him for my Dr.
Oh and for the TriG, Trisomy G? Hello?
Its right there in the MERCK Manual!
Ummm like Drs refer to that all the time or use to! http://www.unboundmedicine.com/merckmanual/ub/view/Merck-Manual-Pro/504690/0/down_syndrome
<b>"The Merck Manual, Professional Edition
Down Syndrome
(Trisomy 21; Trisomy G)"</b>

This is why Sarah Palin has gotten away with this crap. Oh BTW this Dr. is a man! That is one of the reasons she has gotten away with everything.
I'm glad people like You & Brad are trying to break the Spiral of Silence.

honestyingov

4/22/2011 03:55:03 am

Some of theses people ( Dr's or journalists etc ) weighing all the facts seem to look for something ( little things) that would validate their somewhat already decided opinion.

Because if you believe/use some of her statements as being accurate and truthful... then you have to go on the premise that EVERYTHING she said was the real Truth about the event.It's all or nothing. You can't pick and choose.

I would love to ask the Dr if he saw the pic used to show Trig off that was taken in the hall of the hospital in the arms of Chuck and Sally Heath. That big, healthy baby doesn't seem to coincide with what Sarah used to describe him at birth.
Along the lines of 35 wks,(premature ) heart condition and had a case of jaundice. THAT baby in the pic is ( supposedly )hours old. Wouldn't that janundice show very easily ( and could be seen ) in that shot? Even without a case of jaundice... newborns will usually have discolored skin which eventually clears and goes away.The baby in THAT pic shows none of the skin discoloration.VERY even skin color.
Can a jaundice condition clear up in mere hours after birth? Opinion..??
Where is the jaundice condition?

BTW: as the Dr seems to think that the condition of the facility ( No-NICU in Wasilla ) and not second-guessing the Dr's action is unusual or out-of-the-ordinary .. Does he know that Dr. CBJ only did a total of 3 births the previous year? ( Did He know that ?)He may think she does this all the time because as he uses the premise that things are different up there in Alaska... etc. Delivering babies even normal babies is " NOT" a routine event for Sarah's Dr. Weigh that Fact into the equation.

marieke02

4/22/2011 04:11:33 am

Why do I suspect that if this guy had presented a case of a minority mother on food stamps taking a five-hour flight paid for by her babydaddy, his response would have been totally different.

Bobcat Logic

4/22/2011 04:17:45 am

So, the odds a teenager (such as Bristol) might produce a Down Syndrome baby --Sarah's most effective political prop -- are <5%.

And Sarah Palin herself? What are the odds of a 44 year-old-woman conceiving a natural pregnancy then having a Down Syndrome baby that, conveniently, provides the perfect pro-life cred she suddenly needs to be McCain's running mate?

At some point all the odds need to be considered together -- not just in isolation, along with political and timing considerations.

If this pregnancy had occurred before the aggressive vetting and counseling of Palin for the Veep job by the NeoCon/ Fundies in early 2007 (see Jane Mayer's piece in the Oct 27, 2008 New Yorker) it might all pass the smell test.

But, this pregnancy, announced the day after McCain became the Republican presidential candidate? NO way.

Also, too, the many weirdnesses of Palin's pregnancy and birth account need to be considered together, not in isolation.

How would the Doc explain Palin's ever-changing account of where and when Trig was born?

Yes, Palin is THAT weird.

DebinOH

4/22/2011 04:26:05 am

Well, He really is only looking at the circumstances surrounding the wild ride. I don't know, as I said before I am not 100% convinced either way, but after seeing the pictures of her 3 days postpartum I would have to say she didn't give birth to him 3 days before. Since we discussed that on Palingates I won't go into anymore detail here.

Someone on Immoral Minority today said that she actually had her tubes tied (can't prove that so let's take that out of the equation) however the person mentioned that she had it done during her c-section with Piper. I don't ever remember seeing that she had a c-section so I would like to know whether that is true. Is it documented anywhere?

If that is the case then I would like to see what the doctor has to say about a woman leaking fluid with the intention of having a vbac. I would think this would even make this even more bizarre because women wanting to try a vbac would add even more risks than SP had to begin with.

Do they not have RSV infections in Alaska? I cannot imagine ANY normal mother today risking a newborn to all the germs she did at work 3 days later. Specially one born 5ish weeks early.

I know that this guy is an OB but I would love to hear what a pediatrician would have to say. The only reason I am saying this is because my OB couldn't answer any questions about the feeding probs, etc. The pediatrician took care of everything after he my c-sections.

I had two low birth weight babies and they were both born about 3 wks early. I had pre-eclampsia both times and after the first one was born I had full blown eclampsia 2 days after the birth. At any rate, both of my boys had no sucking reflex. It was a nightmare trying to get them fed. They were just so sleepy which was attributed to their early birth.

I haven't met any other mothers who didn't have troubles feeding in these circumstances. All the nurses told me that most babies had troubles with their sucking reflexes and jaundice. An other troubling thing is that if you look at Trig's picture he doesn't seem to have the "downy" fur that most babies have who are born early.

Well, this didn't answer many of my questions and I still think that the "whole" story is just so weird. There are just so many things about the whole thing that just don't make any sense. And yes, I realize anything that surrounds SP just never makes any sense.

Laura Novak link

4/22/2011 04:30:10 am

I never said this doctor is an OB. That's just what people are reading into it. Read his comments carefully, is what I did say. He's saying more in this discussion than meets the eye.

Berkeley Mom

4/22/2011 04:40:24 am

Jaundice is usually not present right at birth.

It develops over the days following delivery, as fetal red blood cells break down, releasing the potentially toxic pigment, bilirubin. This process occurs in almost all newborn babies to some extent.

But in preemies and otherwise compromised newborn babies, the liver may not yet be able to detoxify bilirubin properly, and excess bilirubin accumulates in the skin causing a yellowish color (jaundice).

If bilirubin accumulates in the brain, it can cause brain damage. I believe I just read somewhere that pronounced jaundice following delivery is now associated with later autism.

Babies "at risk" for jaundice need close medical monitoring during the week after delivery.

The picture of Trig and the Heaths shows a baby with a ruddy complexion characteristic of newly delivered babies, but jaundice is not, and probably would not, be apparent yet.

Adenovir link

4/22/2011 04:53:19 am

I'm a neonatologist. I have taken care of many kids with Trisomy 21. From the first time I heard this story, I knew Sarah Palin faked the pregnancy and delivery of Trig. If not, then she is clinically psychotic. Her behavior in the day prior to the delivery goes against all good medical judgment. If she was under the care of a competent OB, there is no way in hell she would be allowed to fly 10 hours with ruptured membranes at 35 weeks gestation. Then to deliver in a small community hospital. Congenital heart disease (endocardial cushion defects) could presumably be ruled out with a prenatal ultrasound, but what if the kid had pulmonary hypertension? Severe Thromboyctopenia? Sepsis due to prolonged rupture of the membranes? A number of other less common complications of Trisomy 21?

This is an open and shut case for me. She's either nuts or the kid is Bristol's.

CA Guy

4/22/2011 05:06:36 am

Either:
1. She faked a pregnancy and is therefore a nut job.
2. She recklessly endangered the life of her unborn child and is therefore a nut job.

Actually, she doesn't scare me half as much as her fan base.

Laura Novak link

4/22/2011 05:07:44 am

Adenovir, I just tweeted you back. Do an interview with me! Come on here and we'll have the same conversation. Presenting different sides is what it's all about for me. My mind is wide open. I just want people to hear what one specialist has to say. Even if it doesn't make them happy. And perhaps this story DOES come down to the family practitioner's role. Let me know! (and you then understand my photo, right?)

Laura Novak link

4/22/2011 05:13:12 am

Ca Guy and Adenovir: it seems like those are the two choices. Or 3) that the whole PROM tale is a lie. In any case, these are NOT good choices about what to believe. Or how to believe in a person's goodness. Or how to admire or look up to someone.

DebinOH

4/22/2011 05:21:16 am

Laura, Sorry I confused your initial comments about your delivery situation with whom you said you had this conversation with, a pediatric specialist. Yes, I can read but I guess not today;)

LA Juice link

4/22/2011 05:33:51 am

I love that you are continuing to follow the story on this. I am amazed that our media continues to beat the "Obama Birth Certificate" story into the ground, and NO ONE in mainstream is pushing this story.

DebinOH

4/22/2011 05:45:02 am

Okay, I read it again & this is the only thing I am taking away:

1) this person thinks it would be dumb to take your baby out into the world so soon after being born (full term) due to infections.
2) this person doesn't think it is possible for this to be a hoax
3) we wouldn't question any of this if it wasn't anyone famous.

I don't know what I am missing? I don't feel well today so maybe that is it?

Jeanabella

4/22/2011 06:05:34 am

Wow! Thanks to Twitter, I found this link.
I almost don't know what to write.
Laura,your position on this story is perfect and appreciated.
I totally agree with the Doctor (Neonatologist)and look forward to the interview. I believe it's important for the truth to come out.
BTW, I delivered a premature baby a few hours after my Dr. told me to come "right" in to the hospital. My water broke!

Laura Novak link

4/22/2011 06:34:09 am

Deb in Ohio: My son also had feeding issues. Complicated ones and when you miss that window of them learning how to suck/swallow/breath, life is a nightmare that few others can understand. But my son didn't have any downy fur on him and he was mildly jaundiced, which I have said presented as a very ruddy, red look. It self corrected.

You know, what I took away from this doctor is that it was "showy" for her to take an infant to work on Day 3. Why did she need to be showy? For two possible reasons.

You don't deliver at 35 weeks unless the fetus is in distress. If the fetus is in distress, you don't ideally deliver in a rural hospital. If it isn't in distress, you don't induce unless your water broke. If your water broke, you don't get on an airplane.

He very calmly, but clearly, said that. He is pointing the story in one possible direction, as far I see it.

But thank you for reading and sharing. I really appreciate it! Let's keep talking!

KarenJ link

4/22/2011 06:35:23 am

Ha... The hedging statements by your "pediatric specialist who has worked in the field for 30 years", Laura, read about how I'd expect from a guy who knew his opinions would be written up by you and then posted on a blog.

V-e-r-y cautious.

Ferry Fey

4/22/2011 07:09:27 am

I'm not particularly satisfied by the answers of this physician who choses to remain anonymous.

Home birth is "weird," weirder than the Wild Ride story?

"For her, privacy invasion would be more likely at an out of town hospital. Is there risk? Yes, but relative to a delivery in rural Alaska?"

Wasilla is not out in the bush. I'm not sure what he's saying here. Certainly the Baylor Medical Center, or one of the other Dallas hospitals just minutes from her meeting, would have been perfectly able to guarantee privacy for a VIP patient.

Laura Novak link

4/22/2011 07:24:15 am

Again, this doctor is not an OB and I don't believe he said anywhere that he would advise a woman to fly under these conditions. If anything, he is saying the opposite. Look at what he says: there is NO reason for this.

In some of his answers he is offering his expertise, which I know he has, about things that people just don't want to hear. Again, that's why I talked to him at length. He has a DIFFERENT take on this.

And he offers some opinions ("weird") which he is entitled to.

I didn't believe it my role to censor what he said on that score. Doesn't mean it's the truth, or that I agree with him. It was his answer.

FrostyAK

4/22/2011 08:05:46 am

"Those kinds of people don’t get through a nomination process because there would be too many flags."

Hogwash! I read an article yesterday that indicated the guy who "vetted" $palin is not very happy about the conclusions he came to. Nor the fact that he is known to have done the "vetting". It was done hastily, and without checking the veracity of her answers.

IMO, this is being hushed up because it would be a huge embarrassment to the corporations behind her, McCain, and the GOP.

There are only 2 options:

1. She lied and faked the pregnancy

2. She neglected/abused the fetus by her "Wild Ride", no matter what this doc seems to believe.

Which is the better of those 2 options? She is exhibiting psychotic behavior either way.

IMO, CBJ (her GP doctor who delivered exactly 3 babies in the 2 previous years) should have her license taken away - for either being complicit in a hoax or endangering the fetus by "delivering" it at a hospital without an OB involved or the proper NICU equipment needed for high risk deliveries.

Laura Novak link

4/22/2011 08:21:10 am

Yes, I agree about the vetting. I think it's been established that it was a sloppy process, to say the least.

I don't believe this doctor is saying there was no neglect on the Wild Ride at all. Quite the opposite.

We don't know that it was NOT an OB who delivered Trig. We don't know that her doctor induced and then went home and the OB on call did it. Do we?

And again, this doctor's very experienced opinion was that any hospital with normal OB services could handle the delivery of this baby, regardless of what we might want to think. That Ds heart problems present, not at birth, but later. Now, why would a woman in her position not want more? He also asked that.

Thanks for weighing in. I think you've got something there about the "coverup." The embarrassment about this for McCain just keeps getting worse.

Conscious at last

4/22/2011 08:23:32 am

Some of the good folks who question Palin's pregnancy with Trig made a strategic decision. They proposed that either the wild ride shows poor judgement OR Palin faked her pregnancy.
They hoped this approach would open some eyes. But as the words of this kind and earnest doctor show, these events can be seen in many ways--- if you assume that Mrs. Palin was pregnant.

I am, however, 100% sure that Mrs. Palin faked her pregnancy.
The photographic,logistical, and circumstantial evidence is overwhelming.
The current push-back of "journalists" who suddenly have first hand accounts of baby-bump sightings is classic cover-up behavior.

Let me remind us, once more, of perhaps the most crucial piece of circumstantial
information that cannot be "sighted" away----
On March 5,2008 Sen. McCain won the GOP nomination for president.
On March 6,2008 Sarah Palin announced that she was 7 months pregnant with her fifth child-- which shocked her staff and others who saw her each day.
COINCIDENCE?????

It was the wild ride that raised some red flags for women early in the game.
After the serious babygate investigation began, it became clear to many of us that Mrs. Palin was not pregnant. We stopped worrying about that story because it was obviously the result of Palin Family compulsive lying syndrome. Palin's father is the one who stated that Sarah was leaking fluid and SP didn't want to contradict him. Thus the genesis of this silly story. It's all a fabulous red herring.

If you want to discuss poor parenting and child endangerment chez Palin, we can start with a "seat-belts are optional policy" and move on from there.

Still, I am extremely thankful that Laura Novak has taken the careful, thoughtful approach to this story.
I think this is called investigative journalism.

mistah charley, ph.d. link

4/22/2011 08:30:07 am

Jason Linkins - 'Trig Trutherism' Laid To Rest By Reasonable Reporters

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/22/palin-trig-trutherism_n_852585.html

DebinOH

4/22/2011 08:43:59 am

Laura, thanks for your opinion. I hope you don't think I am being contrary. I guess the ending of the article seems like it cancels out the rest of the article. To me it sounds like he is saying that no one would recommend the wild ride, yet at the end it seems like it wasn't really that bad and that it couldn't have been a hoax.

I agree that there cannot be any person who would say that flying to AK from TX at 35 weeks (regardless of the possible birth defects) when you've been leaking amniotic fluid, now for hours, would be a good idea. Specially after you have already had four children and you are in your forties. Obviously every delivery can be completely different but I am pretty sure that most women have quicker births with each delivery.

The risk of infection, ruptured membranes or giving birth in the air is beyond stupidity. Let alone passing up the first hospital in AK (or any hospital w/o letting them check you out). What if the baby needed oxygen or you didn't stop bleeding and needed a transfusion?

If she really did this & it sounds like your expert agrees that she didn't "hoax" it then she is a fruitloop, didn't really give birth then or someone else definitely is the mother.

The postpartum photos to me are the nail in the coffin and the doctor actually showing up with a lawyer to answer reporters questions. Why would you need a lawyer to answer questions? SP must have given permission for CBJ to answer questions. So was she protecting herself from getting in trouble like SP suing her if she said something wrong? Or did she need to lawyer to protect SP?

The birth certificate must show another date for birth or the location because there is nothing else that could hurt her because I am sure Todd & Sarah's name are listed as the parents if they did indeed adopt him. Any other normal person would have plastered this birth certificate everywhere. It also would have proved that Bristol was not the mother. Why wouldn't you protect your daughter from all this speculation?

I know - she is just not normal!

I also want to thank you so much for getting involved in this nightmare;)

Armchair Jane

4/22/2011 08:52:45 am

Laura, thank you for this interview.

As someone who worked for years in healthcare in areas that would touch on this case, I would say that from this interview you can till this guy is a pediatrician as opposed to an OB-GYN. It is also about what I suspected from someone who knows that who "the patient" is, and that they are being interviewed for a blog. In my opinion, he is making some incorrect assumptions that directly color his answers.

For instance, he seems to view Wasilla as being in "the Bush". I get the idea he is thinking about transports where you may need to use a fixed-wing aircraft because of distance, which could present problems in adverse weather conditions if you were hundreds of miles from the hospital in a storm. However, Wasilla is *well within* the 150 miles that the air ambulance service Providence uses for shorter distance air transport.

However, the birth needed to be induced. As the doctor said, you'd need a to have a good reason to be inducing at 35 week, such as a problem with the fetus. But if you DID need to induce, the hospital could easily be reached even by *ground ambulance*. Either way, ground or air, you would have an experienced crew for what would really be a rather short trip to the better equipped facility. I'd like to reminders readers who may be new to this, that weather conditions were such that the commercial flight on Alaska Airlines was able to land without a problem and the Palins drove themselves ALONE, out to Wasilla. They could have had Governor Palin's trooper detail meet them and escort them to Wasilla, but they did not do so. Apparently there had been a recent Spring snowstorm, but it seems it was nothing that would have interfered with either ground or air ambulance transport.

Wasilla is a bedroom community of Anchorage. For a similar example, the transport would be much like transporting a patient from a community hospital in a commuter city or suburb north of Seattle, to Seattle Children's Hospital. Again, this is for people who are new to the issue and who may be confused by the specialist mentioning "rural Alaska" as the birth location.

As someone who has worked in both large hospitals as well as community hospitals much like Mat-Su, I also differ in opinion regarding the issue of privacy. Palin was a relatively unknown governor at the time, my own personal opinion is that Palin would have been nearly completely anonymous at Baylor, the nearest well equipped hospital in Texas, whereas in a small community hospital near her home there would be a lot more people who might know her. However, given her own past relationship with the hospital, including serving on the board, along with Dr. Cathy Baldwin-Johnson and Palin's friend State Rep. Linda Menard, Palin would probably have a lot more *control* over the situation at the Mat-Su hospital.

As for the quality of medical advice that Palin claims to have received, I am 100% in agreement with Adenovir, the neonatologist, except I would put it that
1)She is either nuts
2) or she is not the bio-mom of Trig. I think it is likely that Bristol is the mother, but I am not positive that is the case.

Armchair Jane

4/22/2011 09:00:13 am

Laura, you said: "And again, this doctor's very experienced opinion was that any hospital with normal OB services could handle the delivery of this baby, regardless of what we might want to think. That Ds heart problems present, not at birth, but later. Now, why would a woman in her position not want more? He also asked that."

As someone who worked in a very similar hospital to Mat-Su, I do not agree, IF he means that such a hospital could easily handle this delivery *at 35 weeks*. Full term, yes, but the patient would have needed to be cleared in advance with regard to the risk factors. Our hospital would not have done this delivery at 35 weeks, and especially with the other risk factors.

In the past, people working with the Palingates/Politicalgates blogs have contacted the Mat-Su hospital and been told that they would not accept a 35 week delivery.

Laura Novak link

4/22/2011 09:50:45 am

Armchair Jane and Deb in Ohio:

Thanks so much for taking the time to write and comment. I don't disagree with much of what you are both saying. I honestly can see this story going any of three ways (hoax/lie/endangered).

People kept asking on blogs what a medical person would say. So I asked one I greatly respect. This particular doctor said that under normal circumstances, a Ds baby could be born in that situation. "Could be". That's much of what the "medical record/letter" said I think.

Then, the PROM came into the picture. And this doc is saying that 1) if you were someone of status why not try to do better than this hospital 2) but that sometimes moving the patient ONCE THEY ARE THERE is riskier than delivering there. Maybe THAT is when a regional hospital delivers, when it's too risky to send the patient back out.

For all we know, Mrs. Palin drove all that way, AMA or with her doc's consent, and once got there they thought it too risky to send her back to Anchorage.

I for one am now willing to say, Okay, maybe the plan (if she really was pregnant, and I'm not convinced she was) was not the way I would do it. But is within reason, as far as this doctor can see. Before the plane ride.

And this doctor doesn't take chances. There's no room for error in his world.

No matter how you slice it: this story doesn't add up. And why didn't the MSM say to her: "you FLEW with your sac leaking? Why?" Why didn't the doctor just give an interview and clear this up. LONG ago!

It's not too late for these reporters who only NOW say they saw her pregnant, to ask her that!

Let's keep talking. I really am open to hearing all sides of this.

4/22/2011 11:05:42 am

Laura, a nurse's medical opinion at

palinpeytonplace.blogspot.com

concludes Palin's uterus would have ruptured from the rapid, extreme growth in the month before Trig was born. Her site also has an opinion from an Ob/Gyn. Since you are interested in the medical aspects, I highly recommend that site.

Bobcat Logic

4/22/2011 01:14:45 pm

Has the good doctor seen the video of Rev. Muthee anointing Sarah and protecting her from "witchcraft"?

I can't think of anything much weirder. And just where (in which river or lake), and when, were Palin and her children baptized as Dominionist Christians?

So many questions, so few willing to ask them in the MSM...

Mrs Gunka

4/22/2011 01:27:20 pm

Laura, I posted an answer to you over on Palingates. If you could check there, I would appreciate it. Thought about it after I had been here and don't know how to copy it to here. Thanks

Armchair Jane

4/22/2011 04:47:47 pm

Laura, thank you for your response above. I am very supportive of you having this dialogue and also very appreciative that the pediatric specialist was willing to be interviewed.

I'd like to clarify that I am not being critical of the opinion of the physician. What I was actually trying to do was help people read a little bit more between the lines of the comments he gave, some of which were general in nature, and then attempt to illustrate how the applied to the situation under study.

You are correct that the doctor is saying more here than meets the eye, especially for people who aren't not familiar with the tone most physicians use to explain things. For instance, there are many areas where the specialist is critical or skeptical about the account and/or decisions made. However, as with most physicians, these comments are offered in a matter-of-fact manner, stated objectively. This tone is on contrast to the strong emotional tone that you will find in a lot of cable news discussions, or People magazine articles for that matter. Because people are so used to reading and hearing strongly worded opinions in other contexts, I was concerned that some of what was being said would be missed by some readers because of the matter of fact tone.

Recently I have been reading some articles, many by male reporters who have never been pregnant and who also don't seem to know much about medical care of the pregnant female, and one reason I made my comments is because so many of them seem to feel they have done a thorough job debunking any recklessness on the part of Palin OR a faked pregnancy when in reality they have just skimmed the surface of the topic.

For those people, I am pointing out that the specialist basically said that he didn't see a reason to induce, especially at 35 weeks, unless there was a problem with the fetus or unless Palin really had been leaking fluid. (Some "debunkers" have made the argument that Palin wasn't really leaking fluid and that she just might have been exaggerating a bit to sound "tough"). As the coctor said, the situation does make it appear, IF the induction detail is true, that Palin was leaking fluid, otherwise no apparent need to induce.

If she WAS leaking fluid, says the doctor, then it *is* an issue, so why fly, she could have precipitous delivery at any time, it doesn't matter how long she's been leaking fluid, she could go into labor and deliver at any time. Getting onto an airplane in this situation "seems unwise", says the doctor in the typically measured way many doctors would comment on such a matter. The upshot is that the specialists opinion on whether it would be "reasonable" to continue to fly home without even an exam before departure directly contradicts the decision of Sarah Palin as well as what her doctor was reported to have said when interviewed by Lisa Demer shortly after the birth was announced.

The blunt section regarding surgery on patients like Trig in years fortunately now past, is quite sad and does show how much experience this doctor has had. I appreciate his candor on the topic.

My own personal concern, assuming Palin were actually presenting at 35 weeks with ruptured membranes of nearly 24 hours at the community hospital would have had more to do with such concerns as insufficient fetal lung maturity, and other possible complications of premature delivery after premature rupture of membranes.

We have no way of knowing in advance if in the long flight the cord circulation was compromised for a period of time or if there was any fetal distress associated with pressure and altitude changes of flying. There are technical details about the lower pressure/concentration of oxygen at cruising altitude that I won't go into here. The specialist's opinion on cardiac issues in infants with Down Syndrome usually presenting later is a separate issue from the general concerns about of prematurity and fetal lung development in any premature birth. On that issue he said "Clearly kids who are born prematurely have significant issues globally, even though that doesn’t mean every single one does. On average kids who are born early have more problems - even if that’s at 37 or 38 weeks." And Trig was reportedly born at 35 weeks according to the "medical letter".

I agree that no matter how you slice it, the story doesn't add up. The specialist notes a number of the oddities. In the end, much of his opinion appears based on the following presumption: "The kids doing okay now as far as we know, I think. So while the decisions may not have been 100% in line with conventional thinking, they weren’t so far off line that the kid has suffered any significant problems."

Of course if the pregnancy was faked, then the reason that Trig "is doing okay now" may be because all this stuff that doesn't add up is just a fable designed to make Sarah Palin look better. Trig may have arrived early and been cared for in a level III NICU for all we know, and

DebinOH

4/22/2011 11:59:57 pm

Well, I went back and read SP's medical record released the night/day of the election in 2008. You can find a copy on Palingates. The doctor really does seem to indicate that SP had Trig. The only thing she doesn't indicate is WHEN (the year is specified but not the date) her children were born. People have noted that Piper's (pretty sure it was hers) birth was listed as the wrong year but I haven't had time to verify that.

So if we take her at her word we have to assume that she really did have Trig. She used the word "pre-term delivery" at 35 weeks. She did not explicitly say that she delivered the baby herself. She also does not state that she induced SP (perhaps she did admit that when she had her lawyer with her that one time she answered/or didn't questions from the press?).

If this is true then SP risked not only her own life but the life of her baby OR she gave birth earlier and pretended to still be pregnant. The only reason she would have induced SP IMHO is if she had been leaking amniotic fluid. I don't believe any doctor would induced a 35 week old gestational baby w/o cause.

Why? If she had the baby earlier why would you not tell anyone? I believe that she knew the repubs were looking at her which is why she gave the speech. That speech was worth gold for her. If you look at the e-mails released Todd texted/e-mailed some people back home something to the effect that she nailed it. Could it be as simple as she gave birth earlier and went to TX immediately after giving birth? Did she think people would have thought she was an awful mother to go to TX leaving her newborn behind? She wouldn't have needed to go to the hospital to pretend unless she wanted us to believe she gave birth after TX.

The scenario above is the only thing that makes sense to me. Since she was put in McCain's campaign to get the right wing Christian vote she had to be very careful of what she did or didn't do. Many of the born-again/Baptist people I know didn't think she should even run because they don't even believe women should be pastors so how could they think she could be the VP? The only thing I can wrap my head around is that it didn't matter because they thought our country needed a "good" Christian in the White House.

So which scenario would make the most sense to this very bizarre woman/man:

1) fake the birth date? 2) really go on the wild ride?

Laura Novak link

4/23/2011 12:57:08 am

Thanks for reading again what this doctor wrote. His is a measured response born from years of experience. Wouldn't want someone in his shoes to be as reactive or excitable as many of us! And for those who'd never go to him: just be glad you will never have to! It's not a joyous thing. You have no idea!

People don't want to hear what he has to say, that's okay. If it doesn't fit a preconceived notion, that's okay too. He's saying this based on 30 years of work. And you were right to look carefully at his words. He's not giving this a total pass. He's laying out what this scenario looks like. And it's not necessarily good.

And as far as perspective, his is that he sees unspeakable abuse and neglect in his field. Things are relative to him. I understood what he had to say completely. I might not agree that there is not "weirdness" there, in the past, also too! But I wanted HIS opinion. Not my own.

Thanks so much for reading. I hope to have another doc's perspective coming up.

Armchair Jane

4/23/2011 06:52:57 am

@DebinOH,
You have made great points, and so much of the weirdness/judgment part comes down to
a) whether or not she was really leaking amniotic fluid

and

b) was she really induced at 35 weeks?

One reason it is hard to get a handle on that is because the information is scattered all over the place, at different times and from different sources. Three main sources of info I focus on are
1) The initial interviews by the ADN right after the birth
2) The audio and transcript of Palin talking about the "Reckless Ride" in her own words
3) The "medical letter"/"Dr. CBJ letter"

In this case, source #1 has the answer to whether or not Dr. CBJ states that she induced the delivery. The ansswer is that Dr. CBJ did say to the press that she induced. Here is what she said, below.

From the ADN, original story on April 22 2008:

They landed in Anchorage around 10:30 p.m. Thursday and an hour later were at the Mat-Su Regional Medical Center in Wasilla.

Baldwin-Johnson said she had to induce labor, and the baby didn't come until 6:30 a.m. Friday.

"It was smooth. It was relatively easy," Palin said. "In fact it was the easiest of all," probably because Trig was small, at 6 pounds, 2 ounces.

Palin said she wanted him born in Alaska but wouldn't have risked anyone's health to make that happen.

"You can't have a fish picker from Texas," said Todd.

Read more: http://www.adn.com/2008/04/22/382864/palins-child-diagnosed-with-down.html#ixzz1KNeliABQ

It is worth reading the whole article. I found the "medical letter" to be rather oddly written, avoiding certain topics, for instance, the induction. In the ADN article it seems quite clear that Dr. CHJ is saying that she induced the delivery, as a matter of fact "had to be induced", which makes it sound mandatory, implying that amniotic leakage had indeed been occurring.

The induction then raises yet another question: if Palin was leaking amniotic fluid and told this to Dr. CBJ, why did both Sarah and Dr. CBJ feel it was okay for Sarah to wait and give the speech?

Staying to give the speech pretty much guaranteed that Palin would not even arrive at the hospital until 24 hours of fluid leakage. Doctors would normally be getting quite antsy by the 24 hours mark with no delivery and no other treatment or monitoring.

With the time zone changes, according to the timeline in the ADN article, Palin didn't even walk into the door of the Mat-Su facility until 22.5 hours after she called the doctor.

Chris

4/23/2011 11:00:29 am

Armchair Jane, you reminded me of something. Palin left the day of or the day after a huge snowstorm and that an avalanche knocked out Juneau's electricity (I wonder if the leg. was in session?), the city was asking the Gov to declare a state of an emergency but nothing was done about it until Palin returned what, 4 days later?

This shows she put herself and her VP bid agenda before the citizens of her state, IF she was prego she did the same to Trig.

IMO IF she was prego she had no business flying at that late stage. That shows poor judgement imo.

Was the risk worth taking? attempting to fly when she could have gone into labor anywhere and had to deliver anywhere in between when she could have staying in the safety of Houston?

What about the blood circulation factor, sitting for that long? What about the dehydration factor when you are already losing fluid? What about the blood oxygen factor?

What about the low elevation air pressure change that could break her already leaking water? What about turbulence, one never knows when that will happen. And like the interviewed doc said, depending on where they were in the air it could take minimum 30 minutes to land somewhere.

All of this just does not make sense to me or worth the risks she took. Talk about going out on a limb. IF she was prego, she flew knowing the risks and willing to give it a go, most likely why she took Todd along instead of the security, but if as the doc speculates she had concerns about delivering in a strange hospital and privacy why didn't she bring her security just in case?

Laura, maybe ask the doc about that late stage aspect.

Chris

4/23/2011 11:59:41 am

I also do not agree with the premise that because this was her 5th child her judgement should be trusted, she knew what to expect, etc.

Every pregnancy and delivery can be different, to assume to know how it is going to happen is foolish.

Chris

4/23/2011 12:12:27 pm

I've been thinking too much from the Houston to Ak trip aspect.

IF she was prego whose to say she didn't bring on her early amniotic leak by traveling as she did, thus creating the need for induction and the preterm delivery?

That's IF she was prego.

DebinOH link

4/23/2011 12:40:43 pm

ArmchairJane, Thanks for the link. I was pretty sure that CBJ did say that she induced her and I was pretty sure it was the time she was with her lawyer.

So I guess the only conclusion I can come up with, providing the good doctor is telling the truth, is that SP and her husband not only risked her life but the life of her baby.

To give a speech? So this crazy woman thought that giving a speech to show everyone how wonderful she was was worth her life and the life of her child? Let alone inconvenience everyone who was on any of her flights?

I guess this would answer why CBJ took a lawyer with her and that must have been to protect herself while protecting SP too. I cannot believe in any way shape or form that she would have told SP that it was fine to fly without being checked out first. And even then, if she was checked, who would think it was okay to fly twice with a layover ending up in Wasilla close to 22 hours later?

We've already mentioned all the things that could have happened to her and Trig so there is no sense yacking about it again. It does NOT matter that everything turned out okay it was completely crazy. It could have just as easily ended up horrendously.

I still don't understand why she would just not show his birth certificate. I have always believed that to her any attention is good attention but still it really is crazy. There is just nothing sane about any of this.

OzMud link

4/23/2011 03:17:09 pm

Laura - my initial reaction to this interview was 'wow - talk about middle of the road' I wanted to holler "pick a lane mister!" To be fair I put my beliefs in the closet and reread the interview and you know what? This paediatric specialist sounds incredibly experienced - enough so that he's careful to look at a scenario and report from all the angles. That's good, but... the trouble with being able to look at things from all sides is you tend to be too cautious in your responses.

(1) I would want to know under what circumstances this Doctor would not step forward and make a public statement that he had delivered Mrs. X's baby at X time and that mother and baby were doing well. Don't forget - not one hospital employee, doctor, nurse or orderly came forward to share an anecdote about Sarah and her delivery with the press. Not one.

(And let's not claim shyness or feign privacy. This is a woman who plopped her 17 year old pregnant daughter in a national spotlight and flippantly said "hey guess what!" She doesn't get to play the shy card.)

This scenario was of a baby born to a seated female governor, only the second such birth in the history of USA and was newsworthy from the onset. What would make a doctor shy away from making such an announcement on behalf of his patient?

(2) Next, I would ask this doctor to please revisit statistics on teen moms giving birth to Downs babies. In Australia, for example, in 2007 more teenagers became Downs mums than those over-40's. I discovered this phenomenom while researching Downs statistics two years ago. It blew me away to find there are support groups here specifically for teen mums with Downs bubs because that's how common it is now.

(3) And then I would ask this gentleman the $64,000 question: Under similar circumstances, would you encourage or discourage your wife from getting on a plane alm ost ten hours after she's waken you at 3am to tell you her water has broken?

Wasilla Alaska is not that different from AnySmallTown California. These people do not live in the boonies. They are not dependent upon flying doctors or travelling blue nurses. They live in a relatively modern urban area barely 60 minutes from a modern metropolis. There was no excuse to bypass the Anchorage hospital with a working NICU.

DebinOH

4/24/2011 12:04:13 am

One thing I did want to add to this conversation about the delivery of a pre-term baby. I remember that with my second (both times I had pre-eclampsia, the first time I had full blown eclampsia two days after delivery - at the time I never even knew this was possible. I thought that once you delivered you would be okay) I had to have another c-section which was planned but I had to have it now not the on the planned day. No waiting. They put me on magnesium sulfate for several hours to see if they could get my BP down and then it was go time.

My doctor's office was connected (building wise) with a hospital & I had to deliver there. No going to a high-risk hospital like the specialist mentioned in the article. However, they did have a helicopter on stand-by for my baby. They knew he would be small and I was about 3 wks early. They also had respiratory therapist and specialists on call if they needed them.

So why would CBJ not have told SP to deliver in Anchorage specially since she had to pass it on the way back to Wasilla? Not only that but she knew she would probably be delivering him at 35 wks.

Again, it begs the question as to what SP was thinking. I don't know any mother who would NOT have checking themselves out in TX let alone passed up a well qualified hospital in AK. And by the way Todd can't say at this point that it had anything to do with being born in AK. When I think about it, who in their right mind would care where you were born (unless you are two) as long as the mother and baby are okay?

These two don't seem to have the "common" sense that they are always talking about!

Laura Novak link

4/24/2011 01:22:37 am

Thank you all for weighing in. I love your thoughtful comments. First, to Deb, Chris, Jane and one other higher up:

For what it's worth, this doctor is NOT an OB. He doesn't deliver. There is nothing this man has not seen in terms of abuse, neglect and stupid decisions. He is weighing this story against the horrendous and stupid things he's seen and the problems he's had to deal with as a result of stupid adults. That is why I valued his perspective.

I don't think he or any other doc would advise a 35-week pregnant woman to fly while leaking. He says that clearly. And leaking fluid is the ONLY reason to deliver.

But hear him when he says that Ds babies tend to be chubby and sturdy and their particular heart defects don't present until a bit later. I didn't know this. He informed me. So, people who say this baby should have been in an incubator (they are actually called isolettes) with tubes coming out of him, are speaking from a position of less knowledge. Obviously Trig was breathing room air and could maintain his body temperature.

Chris, you bring up a great point about her traveling w/t her security. This doc was addressing the medical side of the story. He doesn't necessarily know these other details. You're right! The emails showed that she told her security to not go on this trip with her. WHY!?! Of all trips!

But as for privacy, I think the doctor was indicating it can go both ways: she might have wanted more privacy b/c she was a high profile person, or....perhaps he was intimating b/c there was no baby to be born? I don't know. I just know that he was careful the way he said it.

And please do understand that I believe much if not all of what you are all saying. I see the points and agree with you. The story is lunacy any way you look at it. But this doctor's response was measured and might possibly take a few concerns off the table. At least, it did for me.

Laura Novak link

4/24/2011 01:34:18 am

OzMud! Welcome! Thank you for RE-reading the doctor's comments. They are worthy of a slow read and take time to digest precisely because they are not what we all expected or wanted to hear. And that is a good thing. That is what reporters are supposed to do!

I was a known TV reporter when my son entered the NICU following a very high risk pregnancy and complicated delivery and space-age transport to the children's hospital (see earlier Brad Scharlott posts). If there had been some confusion or rumors about me actually having given birth, would THIS doctor step forward and talk to reporters? I don't know. Perhaps not him, but perhaps my OB or another doc. My "team" were actually all very dedicated, but quiet people. With huge and risky jobs. Surely the media dept. for either hospital could handle it. I certainly dealt with them on other stories I covered at their hospitals.

The question remains why the McCain camp didn't trot out Mrs. Palin and her doctor to debunk the rumors right off the bat. Quash them. Stop the humiliation. Show her as a loving, involved mother bonded with this newborn. It perplexes me still.

I doubt very much that this doctor, who is a father, would ever allow his wife or encourage any woman to fly while pregnant. He says exactly that: Why would she?

And as for bypassing a better hospital and NICU: He does say that if you are a person of means, power or fame, why would you not choose to "do better" or "go higher" so to speak, in terms of doctor and delivering hospital. He is trying to offer perspective on how she MIGHT have seen this.

But he also points out wisely that sometimes once the mother is already in active labor in a place (no one told SP to drive another hour outside of Anchorage) that it can be riskier to move the mother then. Once the baby is born, it can be stabilized by a regular OB service, and then transported if need be. Obviously, Trig didn't need to be transported to a NICU. And that is not out of the ordinary for these babies, he points out.

It might not be what I or anyone else wanted to hear, but it was not outside of this man's experience to see someone take a chance or want to do it "their way."

I'm working on a second "opinion" with another doctor and we'll see how he weighs in.

Thank you for joining us. I value everyone's views and I honor everyone's frustration with this story. None of it adds up.

curiouser

4/24/2011 05:25:31 am

Thank you for this dialogue, Laura. The doctor's perspective is interesting, especially regarding DS heart defects and choosing a hospital without NICU for delivery.

I wonder if the 'chubby' appearance the doctor mentions is because DS newborns tend to be shorter. Everything I've read is that DS newborns weigh less.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed

/129007

We have documented birth weights for two of the Palins' full-term babies which show them to be smaller than Trig.

Willow weighed 7 lb. 12 oz. [Anchorage Daily News (AK) 7/25/94]
Piper weighed 7 lb. 13 oz. [Anchorage Daily News (AK), 3/29/01]

At 6 lb. 2 oz, Trig was on the way to weighing 8+ lb. full-term.

I appreciate that you used the word 'seemingly' in describing the nasal canula. I copied the photo from Gawker after enlarging it as much as possible and then enlarged the copy. The quality of the photo is poor. The highlights across Trig's cheeks and upper lip make the appearance of a canula but I believe they are just highlights. They don't seem to extend to his nasal cavaties. The same quality of highlights are also seen on the other children's cheeks and all across the photo.

http://gawker.com/#!5051193/sarah-palins-personal-emails

DebinOH

4/24/2011 06:25:46 am

Laura, This is what makes you a good reporter. A good reporter is going to print everything they have heard. They are not going to just print what might make their reader happy.

So let's us assume that S&TP just made what to others seems like a bad mistake. She wanted her baby born in the same hospital as her other kids, etc. Everything turned out okay.

This still does beg the question as to why the McCain camp didn't do everything in their power to quash this story. Everyone seems to be sure that all her photos were scrubbed after the announcement so why? Why not show the damn birth certificate and be done with it?

If this whole story and all the facts that we know are really true (along with the pictures too) then this is the strangest thing I have heard or seen.

Can't wait to hear from your next expert. Thank you so much for being a diligent reporter.

4/24/2011 10:57:11 am

This was a very interesting interview, Laura – thanks for doing it and sharing it with everyone. It’s good to have a calm look at the situation.
One question which has come up several times, in one form or another, has been: what are the odds? I thought it might be interesting to look at various independent data points that we seem to have in Sarah’s story, and assign odds to them, and then apply a little math, in order to determine how likely her story actually is. This is going to be chock full of assumptions and I’m sure the rest of you will have plenty to contribute to make the math better.
Data point/assumption 1: Trig is a Down Syndrome baby. As many have noted, an older woman is much more likely than a younger woman to have a DS baby. On the other hand, a younger woman is much more likely to produce a baby. 80% of all DS babies are born to women under 35. So we’ll give Sarah a 20% chance of being Trig’s mom here (I know that this could be refined, either using conditional probability, which for various reasons I don’t want to apply, or better data regarding the probabilities, which I don’t have). But I think it’s important to remember that it’s simply a lot harder for women in their forties to produce babies at all (especially when they may have had their tubes seared shut, or when they’re grown-ups who should really understand birth control).
Data point/assumption 2: Sarah did not appear pregnant until her 7th month (unlike her daughter Bristol, who not only looked pregnant in the one picture which I saw of her, but mysteriously disappeared for the relevant period). I think this is rather unlikely – but there seem to be instances of it happening, even with women who have been pregnant before. So I’m assigning a 10% chance here, which I actually think is rather generous to Sarah, given how extremely odd the photos are. We’re down to 0.2 x 0.1 = 0.02 – a 2% chance that the child is hers.
Data point/assumption 3: Sarah did not tell anyone she was pregnant before then. Well, if she were faking it, she certainly wouldn’t tell anyone. However, I can imagine other reasons for not telling anyone. First, she had an important position, and she might not want to reduce her work effectiveness with a pregnancy. Second, knowing that it was a DS baby makes it less of an occasion of joy, especially if there is a chance that the baby won’t survive. So I’m not going to count this either for her or against her. We’re still at 2%.
Data point/assumption 4: Sarah did not behave pregnant before then, being seen drinking coffee and with no evidence of going to the doctor for extra visits. It’s possible that with a baby with DS, that she saw no point in taking care of her body for him. On the other hand I think it’s odd that no one ever mentioned any behavior that would make them think, at least retroactively – Of course! Preggers! Especially as her appointments would have been generally visible to everyone on her staff, or at least there would have been occasions when people would wonder, hey, where was she Friday afternoon? Whereas poor Bristol apparently had a car accident in front of an OBGYN office. So again, being very generous to Sarah (and rather hard on everyone around her) I’m going to say 75%. We go from 0.02 x 0.75 = 0.015, or 1.5%.
Data point/assumption 5: The flight attendants during Sarah’s wild ride claim that they did not notice that she was pregnant. Not just not 8 months pregnant, but pregnant at all! Now, if she was showing as much as she was in the Gusty photo, this seems really unlikely. Or if she took off an empathy belly, of course she wouldn’t appear pregnant either. However, I feel compelled to suggest another possibility: they noticed that she was pregnant but let her fly anyway, and then later, to protect themselves, said they didn’t notice anything. So on this point I’m not quite sure what to think – how to assess the odds. I’ll give it 50%, but additional input would be appreciated. That gets us down to .015 x 0.5 = 0.0075 or 0.75% (not 75%, but one hundredth of that).
Data point/assumption 6: the rest of the wild ride. Although I think it’s extremely peculiar, I’ll listen to the medical opinion you’ve presented here, and not go up or down. Still 0.75%
Data point/assumption 7: Internet scrubbing. Many folks have mentioned that after the selection of Sarah as McCain’s VP candidate, pictures of Sarah disappeared, and that even kids’ computers and myspace accounts were scrubbed. Although I could believe that the kids probably had indiscreet remarks on drugs and drinking, I can’t understand deleting general photos of Sarah. Something to hide? Sure looks like it, especially when you think that the McCain campaign would generally be interested in sh

4/24/2011 11:51:05 am

evidently I write too much - here's the rest of my post

Data point/assumption 7: Internet scrubbing. Many folks have mentioned that after the selection of Sarah as McCain’s VP candidate, pictures of Sarah disappeared, and that even kids’ computers and myspace accounts were scrubbed. Although I could believe that the kids probably had indiscreet remarks on drugs and drinking, I can’t understand deleting general photos of Sarah. Something to hide? Sure looks like it, especially when you think that the McCain campaign would generally be interested in showing more rather than less of the photogenic Sarah officiating as governor … we’ll reduce her probability of telling the truth here by 50%. So that’s 0.0075 x 0.5 = 0.00375 or 0.375%.
Data point/assumption 8: the letter from CBJ. This is a difficult item to assess. CBJ’s letter certainly indicates that Sarah gave birth to Trig. So for Sarah’s story to be false, CBJ would have to have lied. How likely is that? I have no idea. There are strange aspects to CBJ’s letter and behavior. Why on earth would she have OK’d the ride back from Texas? Heck, I can’t understand why she OK’d the ride TO Texas! Why was CBJ’s letter released on the eve of the election and not well before? Is it possible that there was a great deal of pressure on her? I’m sure that the letter was scrutinized by the McCain-Palin team – was she forced to say something which wasn’t true? Why did she need a lawyer when responding to questions from the ADN? This is all extremely odd, and it’s not as if we’ve never heard of unethical doctors, so I have some real doubts about CBJ. On the other hand, I must say that if Sarah was not pregnant, and all CBJ did was to lie about it, I actually respect her more. She did no medical harm in this situation and actually protected her patient’s privacy – probably ethically to her more important than telling the truth to the public. However, because I want to give her all benefits of doubts, I will double the chances that Sarah is telling the truth. So now it’s 0.00375 x 2 = 0.0075 or 0.75%.
Data point/assumption 9: no release of a birth certificate. This I can’t understand at all. If Sarah is the mother, releasing the birth certificate would effectively quash all rumors. The only reason not to release it, other than Sarah not being the mother, would be if Todd were not the father – which I think is really unlikely. So here I have to give Sarah a 25% of telling the truth (generous to Sarah on my part): 0.0075 x 0.25 = 0.001875, or 0.1875%.
This is all very rough, but it ends up with Sarah having a less than 2 out 1000 chance of being Trig’s biological mother.
An interesting exercise for a Sunday afternoon – thanks for reading!

Armchair Jane

4/24/2011 03:46:23 pm

@vg

I liked your interesting approach of giving the data points, and using them to calculate a probability. It is hard to figure out an exact weighting for each factor, but even so your approach helps to show how in total, the combination of all the factors together make the story as told so unlikely.

I wanted to add one other factor that did not get discussed, which is that Texas Governor Perry offered the Palins the use of his private jet to get home more quickly. I don't have time to look up the source of this information, but I will try to find it tomorrow. I think it was either Sarah herself in her book or an interview, or else Rick Perry stated it to a media outlet. Perhaps another reader remembers and could add the source if they have it at hand.

Assuming this story is true, why would Sarah decline this offer? It seems she and Todd would have been able to get back to Alaska more quickly, with more privacy, and without the chance of giving birth on a commercial flight, without the layover in Seattle, and no worry about forcing a commercial plane to make an emergency landing if labor progressed.

I cannot imagine why Sarah would have turned this offer down, assuming she were actually pregnant and leaking fluid. The only reason I can think of is that Sarah was not really in labor, and/or there was a reason they wanted privacy from Governor Perry more than they wanted privacy from other airline passengers. The implications of this are interesting.

DebinOH

4/24/2011 11:00:46 pm

Jane - That is one other thing I was going to mention too. Somewhere (and I can't remember where either) it was reported that Rick Perry did offer up his private plane.

Why would he have offered it? The only reason I can see is that if he knew she was in early stages of labor. But then this would completely ruin SP comments that he made when she was leaving. According to her he made a comment about her leaving to give birth (she said to herself - if only they knew). Why would he say that if he knew she was leaving for that reason?

Has it ever been verified that he did say that OR that he really offered his plane?

IF he did offer his plane up I can't believe she didn't take him up on his offer. Who wouldn't? Even if you weren't pregnant it would have made their lives so much easier. If she was pregnant it would have avoided all the obstacles - 1) giving birth on the plane 2) being uncomfortable sitting so long in one position 3) a clean bathroom - I don't know about you all but I find the airplane bathrooms icky 4) the wait to use the bathroom 5) what if she was noticed as a late term pregnancy and they refused to let her fly and even more logical 5) time.

vg, Assigning a value for any of SP comments are pretty hard to do - up is down, down is up, and everything is illogical. I think you were very generous in your assessment though.

Is there anything that is "normal" regarding anything about SP?

On another note, did anyone of you catch the interviews that they had about the candidates around Sept. 2008? I am fairly certain they were on CNN or a sister station of CNN? I watched the one on SP and they interviewed her friends. It was the weirdest interview. The interviewer asked them if they would be voting for her. I am pretty sure that not one of them said yes. They pretty much hemmed and hawed. I remember telling my son that if my friends acted like that I would have killed them. Just wondered if I was alone in my assessment.

Laura Novak link

4/25/2011 01:34:02 am

I recall clearly the first time I heard the story about Rick Perry and dashing off the podium. And my first thought was that her ubiquitous phone told her that they were releasing Bristol's baby from the hospital. Honestly, that was my first thought! Now of course, there is so much more information, conflicting and confusing and otherwise. But what remains true is as you've all said above: why forgo a flight on a private jet? Why would ANYONE do that! I've flown on a private jet. When it's offered, you DO IT! Better to leak there, than on a commercial flight. Better to have an emergency with a small crew and a nimble plane that can land in many more places.

And this is the same trip that she told her security to not accompany her. These are the odd details that make this story not go away. These are the oddities that persist in coloring our thinking.

Thank you for reading and keeping open minds. Pondering these details with people who have closely followed the story, is the best any of us can do right now. In the absence of some great tip or lead.

Jenny Hilborne link

4/25/2011 06:32:00 am

Very interesting read and an adorable looking baby in the picture.

Laura Novak link

4/25/2011 07:58:50 am

Thanks, Jenny. I think of him as a little space man in this picture. There are more interviews preceding this one. And more to come. I'm trying to focus on the journalism aspect of this story. It's my story about the story about the story. Thanks for joining us!

paristokyo

4/25/2011 08:37:59 am

I do not have much to add as I am not as well informed as previous commentators are but just wanted to let everyone know that I find this conversation fascinating. I made the mistake earlier to peruse the comments at Politico following an article on the same subject and I find the polite tone and measured comments here quite refreshing. The "story about the story" is definitely fascinating and I have read the previous posts with much interest.

DebinOH

4/25/2011 09:39:43 am

I forgot to mention that she also said that this delivery was a piece of cake. She was induced which meant she had pitocin. I had pitocin when they tried to induce me with my first son. It is NOT fun nor is it easy. It is painful. You feel like you are in full blown labor the whole time. It was awful.

I also didn't know that you had to have a nurse in your room with you the whole time you are on it. You had absolutely no privacy. They started me on the pitocin at 6:30 a.m. and they finally took me off it when my doctor had an OB come to check on me at 9:45 p.m. and he almost died because my BP was sky high and my son was having problems. Even after all that time I was only 1 cm dilated. By that time they could hardly get the spinal in because as soon as they would get there I would have another contraction.

I also had friends who were put on pitocin to speed up their labor and it actually slowed down their labor. So I guess it depends upon how much they give you but I do know that they also said the contractions were horrifying.

This just adds another facet to the story but one thing is sure she would have had to have a nurse or doctor in her room the whole time she was on pitocin. So that probably means that there are more witnesses besides the doctor.

dmoreno

4/25/2011 07:18:16 pm

Laura,
It would be nice to have another specialist (female) weigh in on the same questions. I appreciate the input, but men CANNOT relate to pregnancy and giving birth, and he seems WAY too casual in his responses to be taken too seriously. He may be a pediatric specialist, but how good is he at treating pregnant woman? Also, he assumes that SP is of sound judgement and that she took all the necessary precautions while making these crazy decisions. We NOW know that is not the case and only adds to the suspicions that a rational thinking person would take such risks--that is the story and I think he (like many men) would dismiss that as important and miss it altogether.

mumimor

4/25/2011 10:58:49 pm

The whole thing is a fascinating story, I can understand those of you bloggers who can't leave it. Thank you Laura for this interview, the doctor seems very competent.
Personally, I am certain Palin is lying, because that is what she does. Someone like her will lie about everything, even when it it isn't necessary (I have family members like that, it drives me crazy). But it's completely impossible to guess what she is lying about or why.
So at the end of the day, the important thing here is the lack of vetting from the McCain campaign. This is the real crime - and I believe it cost McCain the presidency, so there is some reason and fairness in the US.
Since I still hope someone will unravel what really happened when Trig was born, I would like to add a few random things to the discussion.
- The Palins were not at all rich or famous outside Alaska at the time. They were in over their heads both with expecting a special needs child and the sudden attention from conservative king-makers. Ages ago I read that they may have been of the mistaken belief that Trig had to be born in Alaska in order to be covered by the First Nation healthcare program. Another version of this is that Trig was born to a friend with insufficient insurance.
- Labor can be induced manually, without the use of Pitocin, and probably the doctor didn't induce labor till late in the process (if there was a process). There needn't be anyone in the room apart from the doctor and the Palins, since the doctor wouldn't be going to and fro looking out for other patients.
- One of my friends was a midwife in a small town, where a lot of the patients came from the surrounding farmland. She was amazed at the attitude of these women, who'd come in late in labor, give birth, and get out and back to work within few hours. In these families, they just didn't have the resources for the care more urban mothers expect. Mom was needed at the farm. While Palin is clearly not the nature-loving mama grizzly she would like us to think, she does have similar attitudes to these rural woman. She is smart, but not intelligent, and maybe didn't see this particular situation as very different from her other child-births.
My friend, back then, would deliver these children all alone, with a doctor on call from a hospital 20 miles away. The local hospital has been closed now.
- What the doctor says: lots of people make crazy, unsound decisions every day and get away with it. In places like Wasilla stupid decisions are the order of the day - it would all seem just normal if this was the only context (wether the baby was hers or someone else's). But suddenly Sarah Palin was also in another context, that of being a VP candidate.

Mark

4/26/2011 12:32:40 am

First, I have no respect for Sarah Palin.

Second, Trig is Sarah Palin's son.

Third, if anyone is really surprised about the egocentric, self-serving behavior of some middle-aged women and men, don't be. In November 2008, The New York Times's Alex Kuczynski, previously known for her fascination with and self-admitted ready use of Botox and plastic surgery, wrote an Alex-centric piece, "Her Body, My Baby", on how she and her husband had hired - yes, kids, hired - another woman of lesser financial means to carry their baby to term. Ms. Kuczynski's work remains the single most disgusting example of self-interest among the privileged class that I have ever, and hopefully will ever, read. (Note: I offer Ms. Kuczynski not as some pseudo-political foil to Mrs. Palin. I have no use for either one of them. None. Zip. Zero. So that partisan dog won't hunt, Cons.)

Fourth, I really don't give a rat's backside whether Sarah Palin is Trig's mom, as I believe, or Trig's grandma, or Trig's proctologist. All of this matters not when compared to the national security, economy, job's situation, debt, deficit, infrastructure, and general well being of America as a whole. This is as stupid and banal an argument as Obama's birth certificate and a topic about as worthwhile to mankind as a whole as that ridiculous wedding later this week in Great Britain.

Lastly, I found this blog post and many of the responding comments extremely mature, professional, and respectful of other opinions. Gives me some limited hope for the future of our nation. Some limited hope. Don't get cocky.

In the end, of course, it will solve nothing. Just as some Koch Brothers' disciples will forever believe Barack Obama is a Communist-Socialist-Marxist-Fascist, (sic) anti-American, Muslim from the Planet Zulu by way of Satan itself, some anti-Palinites (I guess you could call me one save the fact that my lack of respect for the ex-guv does not include doubting her motherhood and/or being unwilling to examine the facts for consistency, logic, or reason) will believe that Trig isn't her kid and is really some odd religious-political prop and/or the child of one of her daughters by way of looking out her front door and seeing Russia.

It's things like that, Mrs. Palin's comment that she can look out her front door and see Russia and/or her inability to name a newspaper she reads or string together a coherent sentence or show the slightest compassion for a Gabrielle Giffords or display even the slightest amount of basic knowledge of civics, history, and economic policy, that have led me to dump all of my respect for Mrs. Palin.

But the kid's hers. And, as exhibited by her trip to Texas, she's most likely a vainglorious, self-interested prima donna, too. Fat lot of good this whole discussion will do to improve America's jobs market, defense, world status, overall economy, long-term debt situation, ridiculous tax policy, growing income gap and resulting internal unrest from said gap, and decaying infrastructure. All of these things mean something.

Whether Sarah Palin's that kid's mommy or not just doesn't measure up to all of the important things that face America and its citizens in 2011.

DebinOH

4/26/2011 01:44:07 am

Mark, I agree with most of what you say.

One of the reasons I have not been 100% convinced that she wasn't pregnant was that she was being checked out w/i the republican party. I doubt they would have looked seriously at her if they knew she was pregnant. Let alone with a Down syndrome baby.

She is also a prima donna now however if you check out how she dressed in the past - ouch! She certainly wasn't a fashion plate when she was the gov. or mayor. But I really could care less about that anyway. I think she did believe she was the "it" girl so that could explain why she wanted to look thin.

There is also another possibility and that she just couldn't come to terms with the fact Trig wouldn't be perfect. It would explain a lot. Could anyone seriously blame her for that? If she had come out and said that that is why she didn't tell anyone no one would have cared because it is understandable.

At any rate, I don't think there is anything wrong talking about it. If it keeps her away from any office in the future it is worth it. Not only that but she is the darling of the tea party. The Palinbots will never see anything even if she admitted it, but it might prevent others from joining in.

Do I wish the MSM was talking about Troopergate, Dairygate, the debt she left Wasilla in, the oil line that isn't there and all the other things she lies about? You betcha!!!!!

Laura Novak link

4/26/2011 01:50:15 am

Thank you all, from Paris to Tokyo and parts in between!

First, I am glad that the discourse here is civil. That's what I desired and intended. And it IS possible with this crazy subject if only people kept open minds. Remember: my job as I see it is to report. It's what I've done my entire adult life. I must state what my subject says without editing it for my own comfort or agenda.

Reading this doctor's comments, it's not that hard to figure out his sub-speciality. Hint: pediatricians don't normally hang out in OR's with pediatric cardiac surgeons. Nor are they that familiar with their aphorisms.

It's stunning to me how quickly and sloppily people draw assumptions. No wonder this stupid story never got properly reported!

Mark, I completely respect your honesty here. I agree with you in many ways. I agree with everyone who wants to focus on the Wild Ride. I still scratch my head about the pillow pictures. As the doctor noted: there are more important things to be scanning about this woman's political life than this. I hear him. I respect his viewpoint. And yours, Mark. Others, weigh in!

But I love a good story. I can't help it. It's in my DNA. Speaking of DNA...

Thank you all again for this conversation. I'm happy to keep it going. Another post coming today!

P.S. My father went to college with the Koch brothers. How funny is that?

DebinOH

4/26/2011 03:09:03 am

Laura, The one nice thing I love here is the civil discourse. So far no one is just posting a quick comment that is just plain mean or one that doesn't even make sense (like Piper looks pregnant - yuck!). Comments like those make the rest of us look bad.

I understand why other blogs publish everyone and it is their prerogative. I have no idea what your policy is or will be, but I know that you will be attacked just for raising the subject. People also don't want to believe that SP was pregnant and I am sure they are not happy with you either.

Heck, I don't think that they like me when I say I am not 100% sure! It doesn't matter to me and I have been saying it forever. Good thing it is not a trial because I could not vote yes or no. Both sides seem completely plausible to me.

At any rate, I think that had reporters come out right away and examined this it would still not be going on (although President Obama has enough documentation to prove he was born here so maybe not?). The fact that practically no one came out with any of her "gates" just made this so much worse.

If it had not been for the bloggers I would never have known about her history. Would anyone have known that she was for the bridge before she was against the bridge? Probably not. Why did it seem that everyone took her at face value? Why did they just report things about her that sounded like her handlers sent over a list of what she said or did with no background info to even see if it really happened or was even true?

It is just the oddest thing I have ever seen. Is it because she always had her family with her? Because her son was a Down baby? She "looked" nice?

PS - I love a good story too!

DebinOH

4/26/2011 03:20:16 am

Oops, just to clarify the plausibility of her being pregnant. What I mean by that is EVERYTHING about her is so bizarre that why would this be any different.

onething link

4/26/2011 02:37:59 pm

I do not find this conversation believable. I am saying I doubt this was a real doctor. Also, he did not seem clear about delivering Trig in a small hospital with a GP that the issue is not the Down's but the prematurity.

Laura Novak link

4/27/2011 01:50:29 am

Onething: A healthy dose of doubt is a good thing and all civil discourse is welcome here. If this helps: I do not invent information or rely on shoddy sources. Nor do I lie about them. This specialized MD offered measured opinions that don't fit all agendas. It's only one opinion, but I welcomed it here.

He's pretty clear about it: the feeding issues relate to the gestational age, rather than the Ds. That's what he said. Additionally, without the drama of the Wild Ride, delivering in a "regular" hospital is not out of the question or norm. It's the flying while leaking that is most risky.

He's treated many Ds babies and knows of what he speaks. That said, I'm sure there are other medical thoughts out there. And I will soon post another one.

Thank you for joining us.

DaisyDeadhead link

4/27/2011 03:29:53 pm

Interesting.

I've been skeptical for awhile now, since Palin has proven to be a pathological liar, and I just don't believe anything she says, period. (How do you know she's lying? Her lips are moving.)

Thanks for covering this in such detail.

I can't imagine that a woman in her 40s, who has had 4 children already, would act so irresponsibly... unless she <i>really didn't care</i> whether Trig lived or died, which is also a distinct, very real possibility.

Laura Novak link

4/29/2011 02:34:07 am

You're right Daisy: anything is possible here. Andrew Sullivan has documented the lies in such detail. Who is to know what really happened here. And since it's a medical issue, no one can reveal. Wonder where this will lead? Thanks for weighing in!

Megan link

2/18/2013 09:47:32 pm

Hey there, you have here a quite fine article right now! I like so much a finely done site.

Comments are closed.

Sarah Palin and the Pediatric Specialist: Another Conversation

Laura Novak

Blogs I Read

Categories

Archives