Is this true? Death of a Reality Star's baby.

#1 09-27-2006, 04:09 AM

A rapper's wife gave birth Thursday, but the scene quickly turned to tragedy after their newborn girl was pronounced dead.

Rev Run, a.k.a. Joseph Simmons, shocked fans last year when he announced that his wife Justine was pregnant on his MTV reality show "Run's House."

Justine's pregnancy was the cliffhanger on the MTV show last season. It generated intense interest among viewers who have been anxiously following the pregnancy and awaiting the birth.

The rest is here (I must warn you though, the circumstances surrounding the baby's death is indeed horrific):

http://www.tmz.com/2006/09/26/exclus...ty-stars-baby/

I really don't know what to say right now. Someone please tell me this story's a hoax.

ASUADPi · #2 09-27-2006, 08:56 AM

How sad.

Unfortunately the circumstances (is/are) something I've heard of happening before. It is rare, but does happen.

jhujenn · #3 09-27-2006, 09:19 AM

It really is unfortunate. I have a highschool classmate whose child was born this way. They put the organs back inside and the child is still alive and healthy today, ten years later. I wonder what else was going on medically since they didn't do this?

tunatartare · #4 09-27-2006, 09:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhujenn

It really is unfortunate. I have a highschool classmate whose child was born this way. They put the organs back inside and the child is still alive and healthy today, ten years later. I wonder what else was going on medically since they didn't do this?

Is that the same thing as spina bifida?

33girl · #5 09-27-2006, 09:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KLPDaisy

Is that the same thing as spina bifida?

no, I don't think so. Spina bifida is only your spine - this is things like the liver, kidneys etc.

A former coworker's child had this condition also. They managed to get everything working and she is doing fine today.

Senusret I · #6 09-27-2006, 09:39 AM

I really hope this isn't true....I've been scouring the web and so far, no "major" news sources have carried the story yet.

Question for the people who know survivors of this condition...can't this be detected via ultrasound?

ASUADPi · #7 09-27-2006, 09:49 AM

Having not been pregnant myself, I don't know if it can be detected by an ultrasound.

But, my friend who is pregnant (4-5 months along) said that she had her LAST ultrasound at 4 months. Soooo, if something were to happen further in the pregnancy to the baby but she felt no signs of anything being wrong, there wouldn't be a reason for an ultrasound. Now, if you are a high risk pregnancy that might be different, but I'd imagine if she was high risk something like this might have been detected earlier.

As for the organs, we don't know what organs were "outside" of her body. Maybe there were to many outside that they (the doctors) just weren't able to save her. Who knows.

If in fact the story is reliable.

jhujenn · #8 09-27-2006, 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Senusret I

I really hope this isn't true....I've been scouring the web and so far, no "major" news sources have carried the story yet.

Question for the people who know survivors of this condition...can't this be detected via ultrasound?

I would think so. They have really accurate picture where you can see eyelids and stuff so I don't understand why it can't be detected.

I know every doctor and patient is different, for me the last ultrasound for both of the kids came about a month from giving birth. All of the organs should be inside at this point since the child can live on it's own usually and is just gaining weight.

AlphaFrog · #9 09-27-2006, 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ASUADPi

But, my friend who is pregnant (4-5 months along) said that she had her LAST ultrasound at 4 months. Soooo, if something were to happen further in the pregnancy to the baby but she felt no signs of anything being wrong, there wouldn't be a reason for an ultrasound.

I've never heard of this. Usually they do an initial ultrasound (depending on availability of equipment) at you first visit or two, then another around 20 weeks, and then another around 36 weeks. The first ultrasound is the most accurate in confirming due date. The second is a scan to make sure the baby has 10 fingers, 10 toes, etc, and is used in gender determination (if the parents want to know, and the baby cooperates). The third one is used to estimate weight/size, and check the postion of the baby (at this point, the baby should be in a head down postion, with it's back to the mother's stomach).
My at 37 week ultrasound, they did the 3-D one, and I could see everything - eyes, ears, nose, mouth, hair. It was just short of an actual picture. I'm not sure how a 3-D ultra could miss organs outside the body.

ISUKappa · #10 09-27-2006, 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Senusret I

I really hope this isn't true....I've been scouring the web and so far, no "major" news sources have carried the story yet.

Question for the people who know survivors of this condition...can't this be detected via ultrasound?

Even with advances in technology, ultrasounds can still miss issues in utero such as this. It depends on so many variables: the experience of the technician, the quality of the u/s image, the position and age of the fetus, etc...

Last year my niece was born with a defect called a Congenital Diaphragmatic Hernia where where diaphragm didn't close properly and some of her internal organs moved from her abdomen through the space in her diaphragm and into her chest cavity, inhibiting the growth of her lungs and pushing her heart over. Babies born with this condition have about a 50% survival rate. My sister and BIL had no idea anything was wrong until my niece was born--the one u/s they had showed everything as looking "normal." Other babies with CDH have been diagnosed in utero, though, through ultrasounds. It all just depends. Thankfully, my niece was able to have surgery a few days after she was born and is now a happy, thriving 13-month-old.

Most women do only get one u/s during their pregnancy -- usually around 18-22 weeks gestation, but even that can vary from OB to OB. For various reasons, I had 4 u/s during my pregnancy (one early on to check for a cyst, the level II at 21 weeks and two later to check growth).

Anyway, I hope it's not true.

ISUKappa · #11 09-27-2006, 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlphaFrog

I've never heard of this. Usually they do an initial ultrasound (depending on availability of equipment) at you first visit or two, then another around 20 weeks, and then another around 36 weeks. The first ultrasound is the most accurate in confirming due date. The second is a scan to make sure the baby has 10 fingers, 10 toes, etc, and is used in gender determination (if the parents want to know, and the baby cooperates). The third one is used to estimate weight/size, and check the postion of the baby (at this point, the baby should be in a head down postion, with it's back to the mother's stomach).
My at 37 week ultrasound, they did the 3-D one, and I could see everything - eyes, ears, nose, mouth, hair. It was just short of an actual picture. I'm not sure how a 3-D ultra could miss organs outside the body.

I think you are one of the exceptions. On the other Family Planning sites I frequent (where the women are from a variety of incomes and locations across the US, Europe and Australia), the majority of pregnant women only get 1 ultrasound, and if they want a 3-D one, they have to go somewhere and pay for it.

AlphaFrog · #12 09-27-2006, 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ISUKappa

I think you are one of the exceptions. On the other Family Planning sites I frequent (where the women are from a variety of incomes and locations across the US, Europe and Australia), the majority of pregnant women only get 1 ultrasound, and if they want a 3-D one, they have to go somewhere and pay for it.

Hmm...I went to an OB in IL, and two different ones here in NC, and that was their policy at all three...and the 3-D one was free... I guess I just got lucky.

xo_kathy · #13 09-27-2006, 11:16 AM

Well, the 3-D I've usually heard of it being special and people having to pay for it. But I've always heard of women have about 3 ultra sounds. I''ve never heard of anyone having only 1.

bamabelle99 · #14 09-27-2006, 12:12 PM

The number of ultrasounds also depends on your health insurance. A few companies won't pay for them unless the mother is high risk. I had to pay out of pocket for my ultrasound to determine gender (ended up getting reimbursed - turns out my doctor thinks this is dumb and said the U/S was medically needed)

Anyway - I had two ultrasounds...the second because a good friend of the family is an Ob and let me come in for one Free of charge.

epchick · #15 09-27-2006, 02:32 PM

I've never been pregnant so I dont know about the ultrasound things. Most of my friends who have been pregnant have not had more than 2 (that i'm aware of), but I have seen this type of thing on the Discovery channel. Most of the time it is detectable, but the ultrasound technician or the doctor have to be knowledgable in detecting these things. From what I understand, usually there will be an indication that there is something wrong with the baby...slowed heart rate or something like that to show the doctors that there might be something wrong. I've also seen shows where they didn't know and the baby was born with the organs outside---and its usually the intestines/stomach/liver area that protrudes out. On those shows the doctor usually has someone rush to get some kind of "ceran wrap" that they wrap about the baby's organs to help no bacteria or germs get into that area and infect it. The baby waits a few days to undergo surgery because they usually have to put balloons under the skin to expand the skin enough to close the hole and then after a few days the organs get "pushed" back into the baby's body. I have not seen or heard a case where the baby actually died, but it probably does happen.

I seriously hope this is just a "rumor" and if it is I think its a very heartless thing to write about.