eLetters to:

ARTICLE: Viktor Weichbold and Kunigunde Welzl-Mueller Maternal Concern About Positive Test Results in Universal Newborn Hearing Screening Pediatrics 2001; 108: 1111-1116 [Abstract] [Full text] [PDF]

eLetters: Submit a response to this article

eLetters published:

Univeral newborn hearing screen: is lack of maternal concern a cause for concern?

Anton Miller   (7 November 2001)

Univeral newborn hearing screen: is lack of maternal concern a cause for concern?

Vitkor Weichbold   (9 November 2001)

Univeral newborn hearing screen: is lack of maternal concern a cause for concern? 7 November 2001
Anton Miller, Developmental Pediatrician Children's and Women's Health Centre of British Columbia Send letter to journal: Re: Univeral newborn hearing screen: is lack of maternal concern a cause for concern? amiller{at}cw.bc.ca Anton Miller	The finding that very few mothers whose infants screened positive for hearing loss showed concern is both reassuring and concerning. Screening- related stress and anxiety are adverse effects of any screening program, and if these are minimal, so much the better. However, one wonders about the lack of concern of mothers whose infants failed second stage screening. Specifically, if the infants are confirmed to have hearing loss, will these parents be sufficiently concerned and motivated at that point to comply with treatment recommendations?
Univeral newborn hearing screen: is lack of maternal concern a cause for concern? 9 November 2001
Vitkor Weichbold, Psychologist Department of Hearing Voice and Speech Disorders, University Hospital Innsbruck, Austria Send letter to journal: Re: Univeral newborn hearing screen: is lack of maternal concern a cause for concern? viktor.weichbold{at}uklibk.ac.at Vitkor Weichbold	We would like to address to Dr. Miller's comment "Universal newborn hearing screen: is lack of maternal concern a cause for concern" on our article "Maternal Concern About Positive Test Results in Universal Newborn Hearing Screening", published in the current issue of Pediatrics. We fully agree with Dr. Miller that causing too little anxiety may be unfavorable to screening or treatment programs. For this purpose, we proposed in our article that the optimal level of parental concern caused by screening programs would be "mild" or "slight." However, additional research is needed to determine whether degree of concern is linked to returning rate and whether optimization of parental compliance is possible through creating "mild" concerns. In our study, the lack of concern in mothers whose infants failed the screening, seemed to come from a particular strategy of managing the uncertainty about the baby's hearing. Mothers reported that, through the positive tests, they became sensitized to the question of whether the infant is hearing impaired. In consequence, they actively looked for evidence against hearing impairment. When they found clues for normal hearing, eg, the infant's reacting to sounds, they relied on them as a means of reassurance. Hence, the parents' searching for evidence that their infant is not hearing impaired, served as a protective factor against concern when their infant falsely failed the screening. In this regard, the low number of highly concerned mothers does not reflect a lack of parental compliance, but rather an effect of a self- reassuring strategy against undue concern. With kind regards, Dr. Viktor Weichbold Dr. Kunigunde Welzl-Mueller