[Seizethecarp]

Here is a succinct statement from the US Indian Health Service explaining that there is “no evidence” that baby footprints have “actual value” in identifying infants:

This transmittal Notice transmits a pen and ink change of Chapter 13 - Maternal and Child Health, Part 3 - Professional Services of the Indian Health Manual.

Please replace paragraph 8 of Section 2F3.a(b) with the following statement taken from the recently released Guidelines for Perinatal Care written jointly by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists:

“Individual hospitals may want to continue with the footprinting and fingerprinting but universal use of this practice is no longer recommended.”

This change is made because this method of identifying newborns is no longer universally recommended and there is no evidence that it has any actual value in identifying newborns.

http://www.ihs.gov/PublicInfo/Publications/IHSManual/TN_Project/80_89/tn83_7.htm

[iontheball]

Some stupid bureaucrat probably came up with that analysis. How dumb is it to claim that a footprint or fingerprint has no value. When I discussed the existing footprint with a forensic document analyst, I got just the opposite reaction. It has got be better than no print at all.