Baby Driver: NASCAR champ Jeff Gordon and his Belgian wife Ingrid Vandebosch welcomed a baby girl, Ella Sofia Gordon. This is the couple’s first child. Ella weighed in at 7 lbs, 1 oz. Says the proud dad, “Ingrid came through amazingly and we’re both really happy and overjoyed. We can’t wait to get home and start our lives together as a family.”

It’s 4AM, but you’re not alone! Over at the Motherwear Breastfeeding Blog we learned that La Leche League now has a 24 hour, 7 day a week hotline for nursing moms, at 1-877-4 LALECHE (1-877-452-5324).

Circumcision, not the answer? New research presented in the journal PLoS ONE contends that studies that suggest that male circumcision helps decrease the spread of HIV are flawed. Muslim communities in northern Africa, where circumcision is prevalent, do have less HIV than southern Africa, where circumcision is much less common, but this is because, writes the author, there is much less prostitution in the northern Muslim countries. Less prostitution automatically means fewer cases of HIV and AIDS.

Stem cell news: A survey conducted by Duke University Medical Center and Johns Hopkins University finds that 60% of infertile couples would be willing to donate their unused embryos for stem cell research. Currently, only embryos created before August 2001 can be used for stem cell research, and only if the embryos are not destroyed. Recent federal legislation that would loosen restrictions on stem cell research has been vetoed by the President.

Race, not income, affects African American longevity:  A recent study out of the Akron (Ohio) Health Department find that it is race, not income, that causes the Caucasian - African American disparity in life expectancy.  On average, whites are born in 2003 were expected to live more than 5 years longer than their African American counterparts.

Conjoined twins born in Canada:  Conjoined twins, joined at the head, were born in a Vancouver hospital yesterday after a complex c-section.  The girls are doing well, and it will be several months before the decision is made to possibly separate the girls, Krista and Tatiana, as they share two of four lobes of the brain.

Child named for chips (Fries to us yanks):  A 21 year-old mother in England has named her daughter, Taylor, after her favorite fish and chips shop.  Whew, maybe she missed the article about the risks of obesity from eating such saturated fats during a pregnancy.  Regardless, Taylor is a very pretty name…for french fries OR a beautiful baby girl.

9 y.o. Circumcision:  The highly publicized case of a parents heated divorce and the ensuing battle over whether or not their nine year old son should be circumcised.  The young boy’s mother wished him to have the surgery to prevent any further infections in his nether-regions.  However, the father prevailed, winning the case and ruling that the surgery was not necessary.

Posted by Dorian.

Over at the Bioethics Discussion Blog there’s an interesting discussion about an op-ed in the August 2006 issue of the AMA journal Virtual Mentor on cosmetic surgery for high-functioning Down syndrome children.  Apparently, some parents of Down syndrome children are requesting surgery to alter some of the facial characteristics that are visual cues for the chromosomal disorder.  The hope is that the children will then gain more acceptance in the broader community because their faces will be “normalized” and the disorder will not be immediately apparent.

The surgeries in question are performed under general anesthesia and often include resection of the tongue, lifting of the bridge of the nose, removal of fat from the neck, placement of implants in the cheekbones and removal of the distinctive folds of the eyelids.

Ann K. Suziedelis, a bioethicist, considers both the practical and ethical questions involved.  On the one hand, she notes that the facial characteristics associated with Down syndrome are fairly widely recognized and, in general, inspire people to behaving with patience and particular care towards the child in question.  Of course, a bully might be inspired to pick on the child instead, but then a more normalized face will only postpone the mistreatment until the disorder is apparent. 

Furthermore, should the onus be on the child with Down syndrome to create a more tolerant society, and through drastic surgery?

Finally, while parents have reportedly been pleased with the results of the procedure, independent observers have reportedly found “no improvement” in the appearance of surgically altered Down syndrome children.

From an ethical standpoint, Suziedelis questions whether the Down syndrome child should be subjected to purely elective surgery before reaching an age where he or she can fully consent.  And of course, what if the child’s condition is such that the capacity for consent is not likely to be achieved at any age?

Last month we looked at the practice of giving short children experimental steroid therapy, largely because of issues of discrimination.  Is it the modern trend to change the child to conform to general cosmetic preferences, rather than attacking prejudice? 

Of course, the same argument is be made for male circumcision, which both my sons underwent, without their consent, and while we did consider (controversial) medical arguments, we were probably as much swayed by the idea of conformity.

Posted by MommaSteph 

Dr. Maurice over at the Bioethics Discussion Blog is asking the question: Just as female circumcision is illegal in this country, should male circumcision be outlawed as well? The folks at MGMBill.org think so, and they’ve recently resubmitted a bill, modeled on the law that protects girls from female genital mutilation, to all members of Congress.

The debate in the comments area at Bioethics runs the usual routes: Should a practice so deeply rooted in religion and culture be legislated? Is culture just a smokescreen for a cycle of abuse? Does male circumcision offer protection against disease? Even if it does offer some protection, is this sufficient to justify circumcision?

And, as you can imagine, the moderator does a good deal of refereeing.

Visit any expecting club board and it’s hard to find a hotter topic than circumcision. When I learned we were having a son, I was sure we wouldn’t have him circumcised. My husband was sure that we would. After much back and forth, I decided that he could decide, so long as he did some research. I sent him articles and quizzed him on the content. I relayed to him what our pediatrician and my OB had to say about the issue. I reviewed with him the APA’s position. End result? He still wanted to have the baby circumcised. So we did. And again with our second son.

I don’t know if our boys will one day blame us, or feel anger and loss, as some men apparently do, for what was taken from them. If so, the fact that I made their dad read some articles beforehand will be cold comfort. Should I have stood my ground and claimed this as an issue in which the “no” should prevail? Maybe.

Should the practice be made illegal?

Posted by MommaSteph

Anti-circumcision activists are watching this case out of Chicago, which involves an eight-year-old’s feuding parents.

The mother wanted to have the boy circumcised when he was born, but his father objected. (Both parents were born in Eastern Europe.) The mother now claims that their son suffers from painful, recurring inflammation. She wants the procedure done. Her ex-husband still says no, saying that his son is “perfectly healthy” and should not be “butchered”.

They’ve wound up in court.

There are a couple odd twists in this story. The mother’s lawyer claims that the father objects to circumcision because he thinks it’s only for Jewish people. The mother is now remarried - to a Jewish man. The father denies that religion plays a part. The judge will not allow the dad’s lawyer to ask the new husband if he is circumcised.

It’s like an episode of Judging Amy, no? The medical experts, the outbursts, the innuendo. Then Amy Brenneman takes the boy into her chambers to find out his perspective, and he says something like, “I just want it to stop hurting,” and she thinks he means the inflammation, but she learns he’s referring to the way his parents fight. And she makes a sage speech in the courtroom and renders her wise decision.

But as I’m the last to find out, Judging Amy was cancelled last year. In any case, stay tuned.

Posted by MommaSteph