I don't have any references or papers on hand regarding the information I got from our developmental evaluation. Some of what she told us was prefaced with, "We've been seeing a lot of...", the "we" meaning her group of colleagues in our area that see mostly foster kids and many meth kids. For example, she said, "I'm going to listen to his heart for a while. I'm seeing heart murmurs and problems in meth kids as old as ten that have gone undiagnosed because no one is listening long enough." Even if she only had her personal observations from the last 10 years during the emergence of widespread mainland meth use, she was more accurate than I would have liked.

For the most part, she only mentioned things that worried her about Huck. After the first few biggies, I didn't retain much. She comes highly recommended because she's thorough and because she tells parents what she knows -- she takes the attitude that she may as well be as helpful as possible, even without the 15 years of data collection and a published study, on the off chance that what she sees in one meth-exposed kid out of ten/twenty/thirty might apply to the next kid she sees.

I'll try to get more information from her the next time we talk to her, after we figure out how bad the valve defect is, the level of blindness in his left eye, and once he can sleep and breathe at the same time, sans tonsils and adenoids.

Have you seen the article Atlasien linked? My First Lesson in Motherhood by Elizabeth Fitzsimons, from the NYT. One of the things I miss is being able to spend hours with the Sunday Times. I needed that article this weekend. That article, the zoo, and a couple Sapporos made mothers' day okay, made denial a sustainable worldview. I'll just stay there a bit longer.

PS: I'm not looking for cheering up, I'm not ready to look on any bright side, and I already know that things will work out the way they work out. Platitude free zone here, please.