We have scheduled a meeting with Donna Dossey, Registrar, for Friday, Sept. 7th at 10 a.m. to discuss the list of documents their office will accept in order to get a delayed CBRS.
I am still hoping to persuade the state to accept a letter from your doctor as proof of a stillbirth. What the letter needs to say in order to be accepted is something that we still need to work out, as well as any other physical requirements. We do know that the letter would have to be from the doctor who delivered your child, and that the doctor would have to be certain of the case. "I think I delivered that child" will not be enough. This means that if your doctor is fuzzy on the details you may need to ask for a meeting with him/her and refresh their memory with a copy of your medical file before asking them to write the letter.
However, I think we can lay to rest the "we can't verify that a doctor is legitimate" excuse. I recently called the NM Medical Board to find out what it takes to verify the license of a medical physician practicing in the state. Apparently, it is as easy as a phone call or a web site visit. It is that easy for any consumer, and it is that easy for any state official or employee.
Hopefully, we can come up with a good list that will serve most families. Obviously, we can't account for every possible situation, but we can do our best to serve as many as possible.
Thursday, August 30, 2007
Saturday, August 18, 2007
Waiting
Just an update.
Currently, we are waiting to redraft the legislation. The biggest challenge right now is that everyone has returned to their day jobs and is a little slow to respond, but that is to be expected. The other challenge we have is going to be getting into the 2008 session.
In New Mexico, legislative sessions in even years (like the coming 2008 session) are short--30 days as opposed to 60 days. The short sessions are for passing the state budget and other "germane" issues. So it becomes more difficult to get bills introduced in even-numbered years. But we will do everything we can to get it into the 2008 session. If those efforts fail, we will definitely get it into the 2009 session.
So, we are still working, but progress is slow in coming at this point. We are learning patience.
Currently, we are waiting to redraft the legislation. The biggest challenge right now is that everyone has returned to their day jobs and is a little slow to respond, but that is to be expected. The other challenge we have is going to be getting into the 2008 session.
In New Mexico, legislative sessions in even years (like the coming 2008 session) are short--30 days as opposed to 60 days. The short sessions are for passing the state budget and other "germane" issues. So it becomes more difficult to get bills introduced in even-numbered years. But we will do everything we can to get it into the 2008 session. If those efforts fail, we will definitely get it into the 2009 session.
So, we are still working, but progress is slow in coming at this point. We are learning patience.
Monday, July 2, 2007
Happy news
I am very happy to announce the arrival of Carin and Chokri's little girl, Camar. On Tuesday, June 19, 2007. Mom and 7+lb baby are both doing well.
Congratulations, Carin. All my love and wishes of peace.
Congratulations, Carin. All my love and wishes of peace.
Documentation
How do I get the Report of Fetal Death for my child?
1. If your child was born still in 2004 or later, call the Office of Vital Statistics. Ask to speak to Donna Dossey, Registrar. They will gladly provide you with a copy.
2. If your child was born still before 2004 and you requested a copy of the RFD at the time and still have that copy, you are all set.
3. If your child was born still before 2004 and you did not request a copy of the RFD before it was destroyed, you will need to either get a copy of the RFD from various files or you will need to provide other documents.
We suggest requesting a copy of your complete medical records from the hospital where your child was delivered for the time that your child was delivered. Your medical records will include many things, including pathology and autopsy reports. There is a chance that your medical records will include a copy of the RFD since it was filled out by the hospital medical records department. Though it is not standard practice, some hospital administrators may have included a copy in your file, but there is no guarantee.
We also suggest requesting a copy of the file from your funeral home. Technically, the funeral home needed a copy of the RFD in order to take possession of your child’s body for final disposition. So there is a good chance that their files will have it. However, that is not what happens in all cases. In cases where the RFD was not available before final disposition, the funeral home would have filled out a Death Certificate for their own records. This death certificate should have the funeral home’s license number on it.
Funeral home records and medical records are kept indefinitely (barring unforeseen acts such as floods or fires). So you should be able to request copies of these files at any time, but it may take some time for the institution in question to retrieve and copy the files for you. Have patience.
4. We are still working on the list of documents needed to request a delayed RFD and CBRS. Part of the reason we suggest requesting the complete files from the hospital and the funeral home is that any documents on the list will more than likely be included in those files. As of right now if you don’t have and can’t get a copy of the original RFD, you will have to present a copy of the funeral home Death Certificate (with license number) and a copy of the autopsy report. Obviously, not every family requests an autopsy, that is why we are still looking for documents the state will accept.
1. If your child was born still in 2004 or later, call the Office of Vital Statistics. Ask to speak to Donna Dossey, Registrar. They will gladly provide you with a copy.
2. If your child was born still before 2004 and you requested a copy of the RFD at the time and still have that copy, you are all set.
3. If your child was born still before 2004 and you did not request a copy of the RFD before it was destroyed, you will need to either get a copy of the RFD from various files or you will need to provide other documents.
We suggest requesting a copy of your complete medical records from the hospital where your child was delivered for the time that your child was delivered. Your medical records will include many things, including pathology and autopsy reports. There is a chance that your medical records will include a copy of the RFD since it was filled out by the hospital medical records department. Though it is not standard practice, some hospital administrators may have included a copy in your file, but there is no guarantee.
We also suggest requesting a copy of the file from your funeral home. Technically, the funeral home needed a copy of the RFD in order to take possession of your child’s body for final disposition. So there is a good chance that their files will have it. However, that is not what happens in all cases. In cases where the RFD was not available before final disposition, the funeral home would have filled out a Death Certificate for their own records. This death certificate should have the funeral home’s license number on it.
Funeral home records and medical records are kept indefinitely (barring unforeseen acts such as floods or fires). So you should be able to request copies of these files at any time, but it may take some time for the institution in question to retrieve and copy the files for you. Have patience.
4. We are still working on the list of documents needed to request a delayed RFD and CBRS. Part of the reason we suggest requesting the complete files from the hospital and the funeral home is that any documents on the list will more than likely be included in those files. As of right now if you don’t have and can’t get a copy of the original RFD, you will have to present a copy of the funeral home Death Certificate (with license number) and a copy of the autopsy report. Obviously, not every family requests an autopsy, that is why we are still looking for documents the state will accept.
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
Reports of Fetal Death
We have asked Donna Dossey, the registrar, to keep all of the RFDs that she currently has on file until this legislation is passed and signed into law. To my knowledge, she has them as far back as 2004. She has agreed to keep them. Spread the word.
Thank you Ms. Dossey.
What does this mean? It means that if you live in New Mexico and suffered a stillbirth from 2004 to the present, you can still request and get a copy of the Report of Fetal Death for your child. Having the RFD will make getting a retroactive Certificate of Birth Resulting in Stillbirth easy. Without it, you may have to request your medical records and/or the funeral home records for the necessary documentation.
If you need help getting a copy of the Report of Fetal Death for your child, please contact Donna Dossey, Registrar, at the Office of Vital Records in Santa Fe. Or you can contact us for more information.
Thank you Ms. Dossey.
What does this mean? It means that if you live in New Mexico and suffered a stillbirth from 2004 to the present, you can still request and get a copy of the Report of Fetal Death for your child. Having the RFD will make getting a retroactive Certificate of Birth Resulting in Stillbirth easy. Without it, you may have to request your medical records and/or the funeral home records for the necessary documentation.
If you need help getting a copy of the Report of Fetal Death for your child, please contact Donna Dossey, Registrar, at the Office of Vital Records in Santa Fe. Or you can contact us for more information.
Pro-choice Opposition
Our meeting on May 16, 2007, with the local pro-choice groups went well, too, we think. The only two groups represented were Planned Parenthood (Martha Edmands) and the Southwest Women's Law Center (Jane Wishner). NARAL declined to attend.
We did a bit of educating while we were there. Ms. Wishner has been under the impression that we are talking about miscarriages. Really she was unclear as to the difference between a miscarriage and a stillbirth and where abortion fit in. We laid out the differences between the two types of loss and that abortion is, in fact, neither of those. They are all mutually exclusive occurrences. Ms. Edmands told us that her sister suffered a stillbirth 15 years ago, so I'm pretty confident she knows what we are talking about.
They have both said that if we can find the right language, they will agree to be neutral on the bill. That is what we want. Nothing more, nothing less. But they also said that if we find language they will be comfortable with we are likely to then alienate the pro-life side of the supposed argument. (Have I mentioned exactly how much I HATE that this issue has even come near the abortion debate? Well, I do, with a passion.)
They like some of the language in California's legislation (SB 850). Especially the part where the bill reaffirms abortion rights in California, but I made it pretty clear that our bill will not do that. This is not that issue. I wouldn't suggest that an education bill reaffirm abortion rights so why would i do it here? They are no more or less the same issue. We made it clear that we want to protect existing rights and define the uses and limitations of a Certificate of Birth Resulting in Stillbirth. We can do both of those things without straying off-topic and outright reaffirming abortion rights in the state. If they want to reaffirm abortion rights, they can draft their own legislation to do just that. It doesn't belong on this bill.
They have made it clear that they do not speak for everyone in the Coalition for Choice, which includes NARAL Pro-Choice New Mexico. Martha Edmands said that while the national office of Planned Parenthood might be coming out in a neutral position on the basic legislation, she doesn't have to follow their lead if we don't come up with the right language. So despite the recent articles in Stateline and the NY Times where several national offices publicly took a neutral position, we still have to deal with the state offices of these groups.
All in all, we feel like it was a good meeting. It was emotional and draining for both Carin and I, but they now have faces and details to go along with the issue. We were able to clear up some misconceptions and come to a tacit agreement.
We did a bit of educating while we were there. Ms. Wishner has been under the impression that we are talking about miscarriages. Really she was unclear as to the difference between a miscarriage and a stillbirth and where abortion fit in. We laid out the differences between the two types of loss and that abortion is, in fact, neither of those. They are all mutually exclusive occurrences. Ms. Edmands told us that her sister suffered a stillbirth 15 years ago, so I'm pretty confident she knows what we are talking about.
They have both said that if we can find the right language, they will agree to be neutral on the bill. That is what we want. Nothing more, nothing less. But they also said that if we find language they will be comfortable with we are likely to then alienate the pro-life side of the supposed argument. (Have I mentioned exactly how much I HATE that this issue has even come near the abortion debate? Well, I do, with a passion.)
They like some of the language in California's legislation (SB 850). Especially the part where the bill reaffirms abortion rights in California, but I made it pretty clear that our bill will not do that. This is not that issue. I wouldn't suggest that an education bill reaffirm abortion rights so why would i do it here? They are no more or less the same issue. We made it clear that we want to protect existing rights and define the uses and limitations of a Certificate of Birth Resulting in Stillbirth. We can do both of those things without straying off-topic and outright reaffirming abortion rights in the state. If they want to reaffirm abortion rights, they can draft their own legislation to do just that. It doesn't belong on this bill.
They have made it clear that they do not speak for everyone in the Coalition for Choice, which includes NARAL Pro-Choice New Mexico. Martha Edmands said that while the national office of Planned Parenthood might be coming out in a neutral position on the basic legislation, she doesn't have to follow their lead if we don't come up with the right language. So despite the recent articles in Stateline and the NY Times where several national offices publicly took a neutral position, we still have to deal with the state offices of these groups.
All in all, we feel like it was a good meeting. It was emotional and draining for both Carin and I, but they now have faces and details to go along with the issue. We were able to clear up some misconceptions and come to a tacit agreement.
Office of Vital Statistics
On May 7, 2007, Carin and I met with Donna Dossey, Registrar and Mike Landen,
We feel the meeting went well.
We found out they don't so much object to the two documents, but the foundation for making them retroactive as stated in SB17. We decided the best thing to do is to try to parallel the procedure that people have to follow in order to get a delayed Certificate of (live) Birth. There is a set list of documents that people must be able to present, we are to come up with a similar list. The documents will be used to re-create a Report of Fetal Death (or Certificate of Fetal Death) that will then generate a Certificate of Birth Resulting in Stillbirth.
So far the list is pretty short since the documentation that accompanies a stillbirth is minimal, other than medical records. They are hesitant to accept either medical records or a letter from a physician because they have no way to and don't want to be in the business of verifying if those documents are valid or if the doctor is legitimate. Part of me understands this argument. The bigger part of me says, "That's crap." Last time I checked MDs have to have a medical license to practice. That license has to be on file with the state in which they practice. Really, how hard would it be to verify that a doctor is legitimate? Not all that hard, I'm guessing. We are still working on our list.
We were given a very long explanation of the process that a delayed registration of birth could go through. We were told that even with the appropriate documents, some cases are referred to the State's lawyers and some cases are even taken to court. The process can sometimes take a year or more. The impression I got from this explanation was that the person speaking didn't feel a still birth was worth going through so much for. That a still birth didn't warrant so much effort on the State's part. I let them know that my first, gut feeling on that was that they were, once again, belittling families and children affected by stillbirth. Dismissing us. We aren't worth going to court over.
We can't make a process that will serve every case or every person. Even the process of a delayed registration of live birth doesn't serve everyone, otherwise no cases would ever have to go to court to be decided by a judge. But we can and have to do our best to institute a process that will serve as many as possible. If those who are not served by it chose to pursue it in the courts, that is their decision, not the State's. The State doesn't get to decide which ones are "worth it" and which ones aren't.
We have come to understand that "issued" has a very specific meaning to a registrar. It implies that the document is printed on security paper and signed by the Registrar, etc. So in the regulations where it says a Report of Fetal Death "shall not be issued in any way," they are talking about officially issued, not a simple photocopy.
We have also come to understand that the current Registrar willingly gives out copies of Reports of Fetal Death because of the way she interprets the statute or regulation (it doesn't say she can't so she does). We would like, in the next version of the bill, to change that. We want it specifically stated that families can request and get a photocopy of the Report of Fetal Death (or Certificate of Fetal Death). We don't want this left to interpretation because what happens when the next registrar doesn't interpret it that way? Then families are denied the document because the current statutes don't say they *can* have one. We want it to be clear.
The Office of Vital Statistics has agreed to support the legislation so long as we can agree on a list of documents that to be used to prove the facts of the case when someone is seeking either a Certificate of Fetal Death or a Certificate of Birth Resulting in Stillbirth retroactively.
We feel the meeting went well.
We found out they don't so much object to the two documents, but the foundation for making them retroactive as stated in SB17. We decided the best thing to do is to try to parallel the procedure that people have to follow in order to get a delayed Certificate of (live) Birth. There is a set list of documents that people must be able to present, we are to come up with a similar list. The documents will be used to re-create a Report of Fetal Death (or Certificate of Fetal Death) that will then generate a Certificate of Birth Resulting in Stillbirth.
So far the list is pretty short since the documentation that accompanies a stillbirth is minimal, other than medical records. They are hesitant to accept either medical records or a letter from a physician because they have no way to and don't want to be in the business of verifying if those documents are valid or if the doctor is legitimate. Part of me understands this argument. The bigger part of me says, "That's crap." Last time I checked MDs have to have a medical license to practice. That license has to be on file with the state in which they practice. Really, how hard would it be to verify that a doctor is legitimate? Not all that hard, I'm guessing. We are still working on our list.
We were given a very long explanation of the process that a delayed registration of birth could go through. We were told that even with the appropriate documents, some cases are referred to the State's lawyers and some cases are even taken to court. The process can sometimes take a year or more. The impression I got from this explanation was that the person speaking didn't feel a still birth was worth going through so much for. That a still birth didn't warrant so much effort on the State's part. I let them know that my first, gut feeling on that was that they were, once again, belittling families and children affected by stillbirth. Dismissing us. We aren't worth going to court over.
We can't make a process that will serve every case or every person. Even the process of a delayed registration of live birth doesn't serve everyone, otherwise no cases would ever have to go to court to be decided by a judge. But we can and have to do our best to institute a process that will serve as many as possible. If those who are not served by it chose to pursue it in the courts, that is their decision, not the State's. The State doesn't get to decide which ones are "worth it" and which ones aren't.
We have come to understand that "issued" has a very specific meaning to a registrar. It implies that the document is printed on security paper and signed by the Registrar, etc. So in the regulations where it says a Report of Fetal Death "shall not be issued in any way," they are talking about officially issued, not a simple photocopy.
We have also come to understand that the current Registrar willingly gives out copies of Reports of Fetal Death because of the way she interprets the statute or regulation (it doesn't say she can't so she does). We would like, in the next version of the bill, to change that. We want it specifically stated that families can request and get a photocopy of the Report of Fetal Death (or Certificate of Fetal Death). We don't want this left to interpretation because what happens when the next registrar doesn't interpret it that way? Then families are denied the document because the current statutes don't say they *can* have one. We want it to be clear.
The Office of Vital Statistics has agreed to support the legislation so long as we can agree on a list of documents that to be used to prove the facts of the case when someone is seeking either a Certificate of Fetal Death or a Certificate of Birth Resulting in Stillbirth retroactively.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)