Newborn Screenings and the Price of Being Wrong

Everyone in the courtroom could agree on this: If the acid in Mel Russell’s blood had been a minuscule amount higher, the little boy’s condition would have been caught before he suffered brain damage.

 

Computer software at the Wisconsin State Lab had rounded up one marker on his test results, hitting a number that meant Mel should be immediately referred to a specialist. The newborn probably had a rare, yet treatable metabolic disorder.

 

But a manager at the state lab reviewed the results. And 0.1998380 wasn’t quite 0.20.

 

The baby received no treatment.

 

 

Now 6 ½, Mel sat in a big, wooden chair inside the Milwaukee County Courthouse in September. He moved to his mom’s lap as lawyers introduced themselves to a room of 45 potential jurors. Over the next two weeks, 12 of them would have to decide:

 

Who was responsible for the fact that Mel has a hard time dressing himself?

 

That he needs a full-time aide in his first-grade classroom?

 

That he receives speech and occupational therapy several times a week?

 

That he likely will never be able to manage his own diet or live independently?