[don-code]

I am not a parent, but the criticism of the article appears to be around a misunderstanding of statistics, or at least how to apply them. While I agree that criticism is completely correct, it overlooks the human nature of the people receiving the tests. At an already-stressful point in someone's life, it seems almost like bad bedside manner for the medical community, even if in an automated fashion, to tell people that there might be a complication looming.

This _does_, however, seem like a framing issue, more than a utility issue. If the tests are 100% accurate at detecting true positives, they're a great aid. But rather than framing the tests as a be-all, end-all source for information, why not frame them as "a test that suggests whether or not you should get other tests"? That simple wording change would save a great deal of added stress on someone starting or growing a family.

[isoprophlex]

I totally agree with this. Managing perceptions and expectations is super important here.

Having been on the receiving end of a false positive, I'd still do the test again for a hypothetical future pregnancy. Even though it was hell for a couple of days.