Screen 'em all

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists now recommends that all pregnant women undergo screening for Down syndrome, regardless of age.  (HT: Open Book)  The New York Times reports:

In explaining the new recommendation, several physicians said the cutoff age of 35 had always been somewhat arbitrary. “Many women are unhappy with it, because it doesn’t mean anything to them; it’s kind of being put upon them,” said Dr. James Goldberg, a former chairman of the obstetrics college’s committee on genetics, who helped develop the new guidelines.

For example, Dr. Goldberg said, a 29-year-old woman and her partner might now choose amniocentesis instead of a blood test. In the past, the more invasive procedure was seldom recommended for younger women because it could sometimes result in miscarriage. Now the risk is considered to be quite low, and in any event, Dr. Goldberg said, for some couples “losing a normal pregnancy secondary to the procedure is not as problematic as the birth of a Down syndrome child, so they’re willing to take that risk.”

Even the March of Dimes is on board:

“The new guidelines are much better for the broader group of women who are having babies,” said Dr. Nancy Green, the organization’s medical director, “and that’s public health: doing the most good for the biggest number, the good in this case being the information people need to make decisions.”

Who could oppose giving people information needed to make "decisions?"  And at least she's refreshingly candid in offering a utilitarian definition of "public health."  "The most good for the biggest number" works great unless you happen not to be included in "the biggest number," in which case the public health doesn't require the public to give any consideration to your good.