Leg cramps during pregnancy?

Q: What if I am experiencing leg cramps?

A: If your pain is characterized by tenderness, redness and warmth to touch in specific site it may be associated with decreased calcium.
- You may try a Calcium supplement 1200 to 1500mg daily (Total: including dietary calcium) or
- Dr. Scholls arch supports and support hose


http://www.obgyngroup.com/Obst-FAQ.html

A change of mood towards drugging kids

OPINION: What on earth has a five-year-old got to feel depressed about?

That was our initial reaction to stunning revelations that children as young as five are receiving counselling, and in some cases drugs, to combat the apparent early onset of mental health issues.

The Fairfax Media story published last week also revealed that 3240 New Zealand children between the ages of 10 and 19 were given anti-psychotic medication last year, a spike of close to 50 per cent over the previous four years.

Many of our readers would have been similarly horrified that such young children would be prescribed mood- stabilising drugs, let alone have the mental problems to require such seemingly radical intervention.

But a little research reveals this is not the only country in which its youngest members need the support of drugs to lighten the mood.

The United States has also experienced a sharp increase in the use of anti- psychotic drugs for children.

One study revealed that one in five children visiting a psychiatrist was prescribed mood-stabilising medicine.

Not surprising for a nation where over- medication appears to be the default position and its victims include celebrities such as Heath Ledger, Whitney Houston and Michael Jackson.

But another study highlighted a factor of even greater concern. It noted that while prescriptions were on the increase, "literature on effects on children is poor".

It went on to say that "studies are few, methodology is flawed, limiting the conclusions to be drawn". And that younger patients were less able to "articulate symptoms", which meant there was "more scope for confusion and diagnosis".

A major concern when the medical professional is contemplating administering heavy-duty drugs for impressionable minds.

That dearth of quality research to support the medical profession's largesse was highlighted in another online report, which said the "impact of depression and its treatment on the brain in adolescents is understudied".

That is not to say that such treatments are automatically bad or not warranted. This country has a sad and shocking record when it comes to youth suicide, which indicates that mental illness can become evident well before the person is introduced to the daily grind and vicious cycle that adulthood can represent.

But what is clear is a lack of certainty around how young minds can be affected by an early introduction to anti-psychotic and mood-stabilising drugs. And a growing tendency for over-anxious parents and care-givers to over-dramatise and over- correct their child's possibly aberrant behaviour.

It is worth noting that in America, the sharpest rises in mental health drug use has been in its white communities.

Presumably, for ethnic groups, medication for their youth is either culturally unacceptable or simply too expensive.

And no doubt they will be the richer for that.

- © Fairfax NZ News

http://www.stuff.co.nz/taranaki-daily-news/opinion/6683248/A-change-of-mood-towards-drugging-kids

Rickets! Could Your Child Be at Risk?

http://www.thenhf.com/article.php?id=3269

Rickets! Could Your Child Be at Risk? 
By Daniel Dossey
April 03, 2012

          Rickets isn't something that most people think about these days. In fact, most have never heard of the disease. For those who have, they think of it as a disease from the Great Depression, or something that only happens in poverty stricken countries. But that isn't the case. Rickets is something very real. This disease is so misunderstood that there are many in the medical community who still don't understand how great this problem is. There are thousands of infants born in the Northern States, Canada, and even Europe who suffer from Rickets, and because the medical community is still behind the times, many are being wrongfully accused of child abuse.

          Our family has been hurt by this disease. The disease itself has nearly healed with the help of Vitamin D supplementation. It is the lack of knowledge in the medical community that has hurt us. Rickets often mimics the signs of child abuse, and when a hospital doesn't know how to diagnose this disease they often choose to diagnose child abuse instead. This has led to many different problems across the country.

          When we brought our son to the hospital we merely thought he had a fever and a stomach ache. But after hearing our son scream when a hip check was performed, our life changed forever. The ER doctor ordered a stomach x-ray, and the technician noticed that our son's leg wasn't moving, and was causing my son pain. A later x-ray revealed a fractured femur. Upon reviewing the medical notes it seems clear that the ER doctor must have accidently broken our son’s bones. Of course we didn't realize that at the time, and were transferred to a children's hospital where we were put in the suspected child abuse area. A full body skeletal survey revealed more possible fractures, and this led the doctors to assume there was abuse. Fortunately, we were able to talk to a magnificent man, Dr. David Ayoub, and he was able to diagnose our son with neonatal rickets with 100% certainty. But unfortunately, our justice system didn't want to hear that answer and chose to listen to a doctor with far less experience. Erring on the side of caution seemed to be more important than keeping an innocent family together.

          When speaking to other specialists, they find our case confusing. They ask "how can this be abuse?" Our son had no bruising, no internal organ damage, no retinal hemorrhaging, no subdural hematoma, no scratches, no burns, and the tissue damage around the fracture had no damage. In fact, other than a broken bone there were absolutely no other signs of abuse. We also have a daughter who is perfectly healthy. This just doesn't make any sense. And with a diagnosis of rickets it seems even more unusual that the State would not return the child home.

          The key here is to teach others about rickets, and more importantly, Vitamin D. Vitamin D isn't just important in bone development, but also in many other areas of health. Vitamin D has been linked to autism, SIDS, depression, MS, and many other body functions. Infants who are solely breast fed need to be extra careful, and Vitamin D supplementation should be used. If your pediatrician doesn't know why Vitamin D is important, let them know that your child's health could depend on their understanding of its importance.

          In closing, rickets is real. It is in our modern world, and it is affecting far more then people give it credit for. Our government needs to catch up with these new medical discoveries, and our judicial system needs to stop tearing apart families and hurting innocent people. Pediatricians need to understand that Vitamin D is vital to the health of youth. Right now our society lives in fear, and the phrase "in the best interest of the child" has manipulated many people into following bad decisions made by our government. The best interest of the child is to have their medical issues taken care of rather than assume guilt first. Protect yourself, protect your family, and make sure that your child has a healthy Vitamin D level.

Daniel Dossey may be contacted at iamdandossey@gmail.com

Parents of toddler charged with criminal mistreatment

By KATU.com Published: Mar 19, 2012 at 11:20 AM PDT Last Updated: Mar 19, 2012 at 4:04 PM PDT

BATTLE GROUND, Wash. -- The parents of a 4-year-old have been charged after not having their child examined further by a doctor at OHSU, police said.

Patrick N. Andrews, 30, and Jessica R. Andrews, 26, were charged with second-degree criminal mistreatment and booked into the Clark County Jail.

The charges stem from an incident on March 17 when the Battle Ground Police Department responded to a call from a Kaiser Permanente medical doctor. Investigators said Patrick and Jessica Andrews had brought their 4-year-old in to Kaiser to be seen for a head injury suffered on March 12.

After examining the child, the doctor referred the child to Oregon Health & Sciences University (OHSU) for further examination and treatment. Police said the doctor followed up on the patient five days later and discovered the child had not been seen at OHSU, prompting the charges.

According to a probable cause affidavit, the child's injury was one week old and the doctor said that the couple's son was in "grave danger" due to neglect from the parents.

Also according to the affidavit, Patrick Andrews, who took the 4-year-old to the doctor in the first place, didn't take his son to OHSU for another doctor's exam. Instead investigators said he went home to tell his wife about what the doctor said and then told her to take the son to OHSU.

Jessica Andrews, however, told her husband she did not want to wake her son up and so they did not ever go to OHSU for more tests, investigators wrote in the court documents.

Three children, including the child with the head injury, were placed in the care of Child Protective Services.

Police are continuing their investigation into this case.

"The question I ask is this: If they weren't charged in the initial appointment, why are they suddenly being charged afterwards? Unfortunately, I fear that this family may face a tough battle ahead, and I wish that honestly and truth leads their paths."

http://www.katu.com/news/local/143354776.html

Here are a few links to Review our case:

Urgent Plea: Child Stolen

Couple denies abusing son as they battle state for custody

Linda and Daniel Dossey: couple accused of shaking child battles State for custody. Specialist found neonatal rickets. Presumption of guilt? KATU.

Couple denies abusing son as they battle state for custody

Causes: Bring Babies Home

Linfield alumna fights for child custody in rickets case

Wronglyaccusedperson.org.uk

Rickets an Epidemic

CPS doesn't know a good family from a bad one

Read "Vitamin Deficiency Rises"

Sometimes Secrecy isn't Best for the Children

AFR Front Page News

Brigham Young University Law Review

Parents Against Injustice

Tweetbuzz: Hottest stories from [forum.wronglyaccusedperson.org.uk] on Twitter

Our Story

The doctor who broke up families: Psychiatrist who damned hundreds as 'unfit parents' faces GMC probe

• Dr George Hibbert could be struck off over his conclusions that hundreds of parents had ‘personality disorders’
• Millionaire is now being investigated over shocking suggestions he distorted the assessments to fit the view of social services
• Lib Dem MP writes to Justice Secretary Ken Clarke demanding a full parliamentary inquiry

By KATHERINE FAULKNER

PUBLISHED: 17:41 EST, 16 March 2012 | UPDATED: 19:32 EST, 16 March 2012

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2116175/The-doctor-broke-families-Psychiatrist-damned-hundreds-unfit-parents-faces-GMC-probe.html#ixzz1pLsUJy6o

A leading psychiatrist faces extraordinary claims he deliberately misdiagnosed parents with mental disorders – decisions which meant their children were taken away from them.

Dr George Hibbert faces being struck off over his conclusions that hundreds had ‘personality disorders’ after assessing them at his private family centre.

He was paid hundreds of thousands of pounds by social services for the reports which tore children from their parents – many of them young mothers.

He is now being investigated over shocking suggestions he distorted the assessments to fit the view of social services. 

In one case, he is alleged to have wrongly diagnosed a ‘caring’ new mother –  named only as Miss A – with bipolar disorder because her local authority wanted the  baby adopted.

After being confronted with this allegation, Dr Hibbert offered to surrender his licence to practise as a doctor rather than face a General Medical Council inquiry. 

But his request has been rejected by the GMC which says there are still ‘unresolved concerns regarding his fitness to practise’. He will now face a full fitness to practise hearing. 

Yesterday John Hemming MP, who has raised concerns about Dr Hibbert in Parliament, described the claims as shocking. 

The Lib Dem MP – alerted by a whistle-blower – said he had since spoken to ‘three or four’ other families who said the same had happened to them.

He has written to Justice Secretary Ken Clarke demanding a full parliamentary inquiry.

Mr Hemming said: ‘He is someone about whom a number of people have complained. I am told that at least one person has refused to work for him because of what she saw as his unethical provision of reports to suit the demands of local authorities.

Rich: Two Porsches can be seen parked outside the home of Dr Hibbert near Swindon. He is worth more than £2.7million

‘Much of the decision making in care proceedings rests on reports from experts such as Dr Hibbert,’ he told Parliament.

He added that supposedly independent experts such as Dr Hibbert, 59, were often little more than ‘the hired gun of the local authority’.

The lack of transparency over such experts was leading to ‘thousands of miscarriages of justice in care proceedings’.

Earlier this week, a study for the Family Justice Council revealed how life-changing decisions about the care of children are routinely being made on the basis of flawed evidence. A fifth of ‘experts’ who advise the family courts are unqualified.

Dr Hibbert charged local authorities £6,000 a week for every family in his care and £210 an hour just to read documents such as medical records.

By 2007 his company, Assessment in Care, was making a profit of around £460,000 a year from  his lucrative arrangement with social services. 

He is now worth more than  £2.7million. Last night a black Porsche Turbo, thought to be worth around £120,000, and a grey Porsche 911 Carrera, worth around £80,000, were parked on the gravel driveway outside his £500,000 country cottage.

A former honorary lecturer at Oxford University, who has previously advised the government on care assessments, Dr Hibbert left the NHS to set up his private assessment centre in 2000.

Since then, hundreds of parents in contact with social services – usually mothers and babies – have been referred to his centre to  be assessed.

Concerns were first raised in 2007, when mother Miss A complained that Dr Hibbert had wrongly diagnosed her with a bipolar disorder. 

One consultant psychiatrist accused Dr Hibbert of having ‘no evidence’ for some of his claims and of deliberately ‘exaggerating’ and ‘misrepresenting’ aspects of the woman’s behaviour.

Her report is among a number of documents being examined by the GMC with regards to Dr Hibbert.

Miss A, who has seen her son just a few times since, said Dr Hibbert was ‘corrupt and evil.’ 

‘Nothing will ever make up for what he has done to me and my child,’ Miss A said. ‘I want to make sure this man is exposed and that he can never do this to anybody else.’ 

In a letter sent to Miss A, a GMC investigations officer confirmed Dr Hibbert ‘has now applied for voluntary erasure from the medical register’.

In demand: Dr Hibbert was paid hundreds of thousands of pounds by social services for reports which tore children from their parents - many of them young mothers

The letter continued: ‘He has no intention of returning to clinical practice in the future.’

However, the GMC officer concluded it was in the ‘public interest’ for his request to be denied ‘in view of the nature of the performance allegations and in the view of the conduct concerns.’ 

He has not been available for comment at his two-storey detached cottage in the small village of Blunsdon near Swindon. His assessment centre next to his home appeared to be closed.

A spokesman for Dr Hibbert at the Medical Protection Society, the indemnity organisation for doctors, said professional confidentiality meant Dr Hibbert was ‘unable to comment on allegations raised in relation to care of a patient’. 

Paul Grant, of Bernard Chill & Axtell Solicitors, who represents Miss A, said: ‘Our client has instructed us to launch proceedings against Dr Hibbert and the local authority. 

‘We believe this distressing case may be the tip of a very big iceberg.’

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2116175/The-doctor-broke-families-Psychiatrist-damned-hundreds-unfit-parents-faces-GMC-probe.html#ixzz1pLsfdGLJ 

9000 visits! Sharing is Caring

WOW! 9000! Thanks for taking the time to visit our blog. There are so many important things going on here, and if you are reading what we have to say, it may save you a lot of hassle. Vitamin D is so very important, and for those who still don't know much about it, definitely do as much research as you can. If you're pregnant take vitamin D supplements. Give your children Vitamin D supplements! Vitamin D is not only very important for bone health, but many studies are showing that it plays a role in many different things including SIDS, Depression, MS, Autism, and so much more!

We also have shared our story and the nightmare we're going through. If you haven't read it yet, visit Our Story. We've talked to so many doctors, and most agree that things have gone WAY too far! We've contacted politicians, we've contacted schools, we've even gone to the media now. If you know someone else who is suffering from false allegations of child abuse, have them e-mail me their story and I'll do my best to share it too. Thank You.

How Competent Are Expert Witnesses?

Tuesday 13 March 2012

Around 20 per cent of psychologists acting as expert witnesses for the family courts are not qualified, according to a Channel 4 News investigation broadcast tonight, writes producer Phil Carter.

The findings are based on research published on Wednesday for the Family Justice Council (FJC). It was led by Professor Jane Ireland, a forensic psychologist at the University of Central Lancashire.

Prof Ireland and her team were given unprecedented access to psychologists' expert witness reports from three undisclosed courts across England by the FJC, an arm's length body of theMinistry of Justice.

Experts play a critical role in family court cases: research suggests that at least one expert is used in 90 per cent of public law children's proceedings and many cases involve three or more experts.

I think the results from the research are enough to suggest that we do need an urgent review across the range of expert witnesses that the courts are employing.Prof Jane Ireland, University of Central Lancashire

The majority of these experts are psychiatrists and psychologists, employed to provide expert opinion on a range of matters in these cases, typically including questions as to whether parents have the ability to care for their children, display personality disorders or other psychological issues and whether any such diagnoses are treatable within a timescale suitable for the children involved.

Channel 4 News spoke to families across the country involved in court proceedings and heard time and again concerns about the experts used by the courts to determine whether children are at risk and should be removed from their birth parents.

Secrecy

But because of the secrecy of the family courts - designed to protect the identity of the children at the heart of proceedings - the experts used have largely been beyond scrutiny.

This research is the first time these concerns have been to some degree independently substantiated. The research found serious concerns across a range of issues beyond the startling finding that around a fifth of so-called psychologist expert witnesses are not qualified.

The assessments of the expert reports found that some 20 per cent of the psychologists were working beyond their area of knowledge; around a third had no experience of mental health assessments; and some 90 per cent of experts were not in current practice.

The net result was that the research concluded that around 65 per cent of expert reports in the study were of either 'poor' or 'very poor' quality.

Professor Ireland told Channel 4 News: "I think we were very concerned and perturbed by some of the reports that we read, not just in terms of qualification but also the quality of the reports that we read ..."

'Draconian'

Nigel Priestley, a lawyer closely involved in family proceedings, told Channel 4 News of the gravity of the research's findings. "After the death penalty the most draconian act that the state can do is remove a family's child," he said. "What is at stake for many carers is the loss of their children and on the basis of a report which might or indeed might not be questionable."

After the death penalty the most draconian act that the state can do is remove a family's child.Nigel Priestly, lawyer

He regularly deals with cases where parents feel the expert evidence is flawed. But it is the scale of the problem revealed by the new research which has surprised him.

He said: "If the statistics are that 20 per cent are unqualified that is not just a mess, that is staggering, wrong ... this is not just about making money, this is about removing children very often or, more importantly, protecting children ..."

Disturbing

One of the more surprising findings of the research was that some psychologists were recorded as assessing parents without ever meeting or seeing them.

Prof Ireland told Channel 4 News: "You should never be in a position where you diagnose somebody, or make judgements on them, if you haven't seen them. It goes completely against code of conduct and ethics and it is impossible. You can’t do a paper assessment on a human being, you have to meet that person, understand their interactions, build a rapport and then take your judgement on the basis of that."

But Channel 4 News has learnt that this is not just a problem confined to psychologists. One mother who spoke on condition of anonymity recently left England after a private law family court case over custody of her children.

This case involved some eight expert witnesses. One, a psychiatrist, provided the court with an assessment of a potential change of residence for the children without meeting the mother or the children. The mother described the family court system and the repeated use of experts as barbaric.

The day after the psychiatrist completed the report on the mother he was suspended by the GMC for a separate offence. Yet, despite the concerns over assessing people without ever actually seeing them, it seems that courts are willing to accept such reports.

The research is the first of its kind and clearly has limitations, which the report itself acknowledges. The sample size was relatively small at 126 reports and the methodology to objectively quantify quality is likely to need further refinement.

Concern

But the range and scale of the problems identified suggest that this is unlikely to be explained solely by methodological shortcomings.

Intriguingly, the research also suggests that the problems may extend well beyond psychologists. Indeed, in the course of the investigation, Channel 4 News uncovered serious areas of concern with both psychiatrists and paediatricians as well as play therapists and others providing expert services to the family courts.

"I think the results from the research are enough to suggest that we do need an urgent review across the range of expert witnesses that the courts are employing," said Professor Ireland.

http://www.channel4.com/news/how-competent-are-expert-witnesses 

Missouri House Wants to Penalize the Innocent.

Missouri House Wants to Increase Prison Time for Shaken Baby Cases

-->

By: KOLR10 News

Updated: March 8, 2012

(Jefferson City, MO)--Lawmakers in the Missouri House are looking at ways to stiffen penalties for those who hurt or kill a baby by shaking them.

The Associated Press reports the House has endorsed a measure that would expand Missouri's child abuse law.

The bill's sponsor says the current law makes it hard to prosecute people when a child dies from Shaken Baby Syndrome.

The bill would make it a crime to "recklessly cause head injuries" to any child.

Currently, abusers face up to seven years in prison.
This measure would raise prison time up to fifteen years, if the child is younger than two years old.

"Child abuse is despicable, and I have little sympathy for those who inflict it, especially in cases resulting in the death of the infant. However, the diagnosis of Shaken Baby Syndrome (aka Abusive Head Trauma) has been increasingly under fire of the past several years, with many, many doctors now coming forward to state their concerns about how the diagnosis is being misused to convict the innocent. I'm not sure which is more despicable: sending an innocent, grieving parent to prison when their infant dies of natural causes, or the child abuse itself. In fact, even the man who created the diagnosis, A. Norman Guthkelch, is now "horrified" by the way his diagnosis has been perverted and over-diagnosed to the point that perhaps hundreds of innocent people are sent to prison every year. http://www.npr.org/2011/06/29/137471992/rethinking-shaken-baby-syndrome Furthermore, Dr. Waney Squier, one of the top infant neuropathologists in the world has stated that she feels that perhaps HALF OR MORE of Shaken Baby http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1382290/At-half-parents-tried-shaken-baby-syndrome-wrongly-convicted-expert-warns.html The UK and Canada have both begun to recognize the horrible mistakes that this faulty diagnosis have caused, but the United States is lagging far behind. And now we want to increase the penalty for crimes that may not even be real? This is madness. Professor Deborah Tuerkheimer recently wrote a paper on the problems regarding the prosecution of Shaken Baby Syndrome from a legal standpoint. In her opinion as well, some day we are going to have to come to terms with an injustice that we have never before faced in our legal system, and it will be monumental, as this diagnosis is eventually proven to be junk science. http://lawreview.wustl.edu/inprint/87/1/dtuerkheimer.pdf

Jeremy P. March 8, 2012 at 9:51 am"

What is Differential Diagnosis

"A differential diagnosis (sometimes abbreviated DDx, ddx, DD, D/Dx, or ΔΔ) is a systematic diagnostic method used to identify the presence of an entity where multiple alternatives are possible (and the process may be termed differential diagnostic procedure), and may also refer to any of the included candidate alternatives (which may also be termed candidate condition). This method is essentially a process of elimination, or at least, rendering of the probabilities of candidate conditions to negligible levels. In this sense, probabilities are, in fact, imaginative parameters in the mind or hardware of the diagnostician or system, while in reality the target (such as a patient) either has a condition or not with an actual probability of either 0 or 100%."

In this process you examine what symptoms are present and what symptoms aren't. But it is often seen in child abuse cases that these steps are ignored. Often it is simply assumed that child abuse is the answer, when there truly is an underlying condition. In our case there were so many factors missing for them to diagnose abuse. In child abuse you look for bruising, bleeding, burns, cuts, bleeding on the brain, retinal hemorrhaging, subdural hematoma, damage to the internal organs, and damage to bones. When you are looking at a child that has a broken bone, but no bruising, bleeding, burns, cuts, bleeding on the brain, retinal hemorrhaging, subdural hematoma, damage to the internal organs, and even no damage to the tissue surrounding the fracture then according to the process of differential diagnosis, the probability of child abuse being present is greatly reduced, and the likelihood of a metabolic bone issue is greatly increased. If a doctor chooses to ignore these factors then they are essentially violating the Hippocratic oath. What do you think? Shouldn't doctors actually follow a scientific process to come to their solutions rather then making an assumption that can utterly destroy a family? Shouldn't it be more important to be sure of a diagnosis before you testify to it in court? Shouldn't a doctor who has clearly not followed the differential diagnosis process have to answer for his erroneous ways?