They don't need to be informed to know that baby teeth are not permanent, it's common sense and knowledge. Parents are to blame because they don't exercise common sense. Why put your child through a risky procedure to fix teeth that will eventually fall out?
And why would any parent in that situation do anything but grab the kid and run out the door while dialing 911, for Christ's sake? Not that I'm by an means excusing the dentist who afaic (at first glance and without giving it any professional consideration) should be charged with negligent homicide at the very least, but still...Why would anybody crown baby teeth. That is insane.
Actually, that has become one of the important points in the context of this thread. People in this thread are effectively blaming the parents here for not being trained dentists. Ironically though, some people in this thread who think they know better are suggesting kids don't need dental work because the teeth will eventually fall out anyway, but that is simply not correct.Whether or not filling or other work is required at what age is not the point here. The dentist was committing full on fraud when he said the infant needed fillings and crowns. The autopsy showed no signs of any of these defects. Straight up fraud rip off that cost a life.
I wouldn't say I'm "blaming the parents". It wasn't they who sedated the kid (properly or otherwise?) for no medical reason whatever. But I am saying that as matter of factual causation, if they weren't apparently complete morons, their kid would probably still be alive despite a run-in with a positively evil dentist... I mean seriously, just the fact that allegedly necessary work would require "sedation" of a toddler would have me asking a lot of questions all by itself, never mind demanding to know how the extensive work "discovered" at the last moment had somehow "slipped past" a visual exam and X-rays... (And in all seriousness, if a dentist (or any healthcare provider) gave me a horsehit story like that, even if I weren't completely sure he was lying right then and there, I'd rather be safe than sorry and would flat out tell him not to go near the kid again and then leave, worrying about considering my next step after the kid was safely in bed at home...)Actually, that has become one of the important points in the context of this thread. People in this thread are effectively blaming the parents here for not being trained dentists. Ironically though, some people in this thread who think they know better are suggesting kids don't need dental work because the teeth will eventually fall out anyway, but that is simply not correct.
Actually, I probably would have had the same reaction as you, and would have gone for a second opinion too. But my post wasn't really aimed specifically at you.I wouldn't say I'm "blaming the parents". But I am saying that as simple matter of factual causation, if they weren't apparently complete morons, their kid would probably still be alive despite a run-in with a positively evil dentist... I mean seriously, the simple fact that allegedly "necessary" work would require "sedation" of a toddler would have me asking a lot of questions all by itself, never mind demanding to know how the extensive work "discovered" at the last moment had somehow "slipped past" a visual exam and X-rays... (And in all seriousness, if a dentist gave me a horsehit line like that, even if I weren't completely sure he was lying, I'd rather be safe than sorry and would flat out tell him not to go near the kid again and then leave, worrying about considering my next step after the kid was safely in bed at home...)
Huh. Interesting. There's no doubt that oral hygiene is important for little kids (there is, unfortunately, no such thing as "baby gums", and despite their appearance, gums are basically all bone under a fairly thin layer of soft tissue, and equally unfortunately, any real damage to them at any age is more or less permanent, or at least has lasting ramifications.) But I'm a little surprised the initial cavities didn't cause noticeable pain before the decay got far enough to warrant crowns. Because they can cause problems of their own, they're usually considered "medically advisable" only when fillings are no longer sufficient...My son has two crowns, due to my neglect in not forcing him to floss. At first I thought "BS, they are going to fall out eventually anyway", but after doing some research we found that healthy baby teeth promote proper mouth structure and health of the future "adult" tooth.
Of course they're not permanent, but a kid is stuck with them for quite some time. I would be surprised if milk teeth didn't sometimes require fillings for the same immediate reasons that adults do, to prevent disease and unnecessary pain.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8112603.stm
You're suggesting leaving cavities untreated for one or more years when they occur in young children? That would be extremely unwise. Fortunately, I gather you aren't a dentist...I cannot wrap my head around it. A baby has milk teeth and will get the permanent teeth around 7-11 years.
Why would they do fillings and crowns on milk teeth ? Parents and dentist are insane.
We are talking about a 14-month toddler here, not a 3 or 5 year old. At 14-month, their teeth can't be more than 6-7 months old. All I am saying is exercise some goddamn common sense and don't just let the professional do whatever the fuck they want. It's like bringing your brand new car in for an oil change and your mechanic wants to swap the whole engine. Wouldn't that raise a red flag for you?