Louisiana's “Medically Futile” Unborn Child List: Ethical Lessons at the Post-Dobbs Intersection of Reproductive and Disability Justice

Ableist attitudes and structures are increasingly recognized across all sectors of health care delivery. After Dobbs, novel questions arose in the United States concerning how to protect reproductive autonomy while avoiding discrimination against and devaluation of disabled persons. In this essay, we examine the Louisiana Department of Health's emergency declaration, “List of Conditions That Shall Deem an Unborn Child ‘Medically Futile,’” issued August 1, 2022. We raise a number of medical, ethical, and public health concerns that lead us to argue that the declaration should be rescinded. Analysis of this ethically objectionable declaration provides valuable lessons about how to uphold both reproductive and disability justice in a post-Dobbs landscape.     

A tail of two sides: Artificially doubled false positive rates in neuroimaging due to the sidedness choice with t‐tests

One‐sided t‐tests are widely used in neuroimaging data analysis. While such a test may be applicable when investigating specific regions and prior information about directionality is present, we argue here that it is often mis‐applied, with severe consequences for false positive rate (FPR) control. Conceptually, a pair of one‐sided t‐tests conducted in tandem (e.g., to test separately for both positive and negative effects), effectively amounts to a two‐sided t‐test. However, replacing the two‐sided test with a pair of one‐sided tests without multiple comparisons correction essentially doubles the intended FPR of statements made about the same study; that is, the actual family‐wise error (FWE) of results at the whole brain level would be 10% instead of the 5% intended by the researcher. Therefore, we strongly recommend that, unless otherwise explicitly justified, two‐sided t‐tests be applied instead of two simultaneous one‐sided t‐tests.