.
Feedback

Visible Birth Defect Impacts Children and Parents

A visible birth defect on a child's face may bring emotional and physical challenges. A skilled pediatric surgeon specializing in facial plastic surgery can provide support and treatment options.

By Tae Ho Kim, M.D., The New York Group for Plastic Surgery

A mom and dad came into my office, pushing a stroller with a baby blanket draped over the front to block their baby from view. These parents loved their child dearly, but could no longer stand the stares and comments from people at the sight of their child’s visible facial growth.  After unveiling the blanket, they introduced me to their child with a large fleshy growth on the forehead. The parents called it a "doorknob."

This particular facial growth or tumor is known as a “hemangioma.” Hemangiomas are benign (non-cancerous) capillary (blood vessel) tumors. When a hemangioma is big and superficial to the skin, it looks like a reddish-fleshy tumor on the face or body. Some people call it a strawberry patch. A hemangioma is the most common tumor of infancy.

A hemangioma usually appears at birth as a reddish blush of the skin; the baby otherwise looks normal. A hemangioma will grow rapidly for the first three to four months, then more slowly up to one year of age. Then the hemangioma will slowly get smaller and may disappear completely. When the hemangioma is small and flat, it will most likely fade away completely without leaving any scar or skin deformity. This process may take several years, but in the end the skin can look completely normal. Occasionally, lasers may help to treat any remaining reddish areas.

The problem is that not all hemangiomas go away. Sometimes a hemangioma will grow quite large, and not disappear on its own. Parents may be told by well-meaning pediatricians or surgeons that this hemangioma will shrink over time without leaving a visible scar or facial disfigurement. But though the hemangioma will shrink from its largest size, it’s likely to leave behind noticeable scars and residual boggy skin and soft tissue that can even drag down one side of a child’s face.

Clearly, our society is image-conscious and looking normal or attractive is one important component to the psychological and emotional well-being of a child. If a child’s hemangioma is very noticeable, parents may feel embarrassed, and guilty about feeling that way. Parents have to confront negative comments or long stares from family and strangers alike.  Parents feel frustrated and sad if their child is teased. Going out in public may be stressful and difficult.  As many parents know, a child as young as two years old is self-aware and can recognize that something about him or her is “different." A large, visible deformity, especially on the face, can negatively impact a child’s self-esteem during critical years of development.    

Rest assured, most children are born free of birth defects like a hemangioma. Also, most hemangiomas are small and flat and will eventually go away without any medical interference. Therefore, when a pediatrician says, ‘don’t worry, it will go away’, it is good advice. Yet there are occasions when the hemangioma grows very fast and very large. There are children with permanent disfigurement from the remaining hemangioma left behind after waiting five or seven years. For those children, operating early may be most beneficial if done by an experienced pediatric plastic surgeon. For children with such large fleshy tumors, especially on the face, one operation could help prevent the many years of emotional and psychological distress for the child and parents.

Dr. Tae Ho Kim, a board certified plastic and reconstructive surgeon, is Assistant Professor at New York Medical College and Chief of Pediatric Plastic and Craniofacial Surgery at the Maria Fareri Children's Hospital at Westchester Medical Center. He is a partner with the New York Group for Plastic Surgery. http://www.nygplasticsurgery.com

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Pleasantville-Briarcliff Manor Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Sonny (Louis) Linder May 18, 2013 at 06:06 am
Thanks, Jon - you raise important considerations and in a calm, dispassionate way, which IRead More appreciate. As for alternative funding mechanisms, in hindsight I believe they should have been examined and addressed this earlier this year had the decision-making been opened up to the public in a completely bidirectional manner much earlier in this year's budget cycle. A real take-away from this situation, in my opinion, is that we in the community were not given the opportunity to sit down together with sharpened pencils in a public forum and allowed to vet and actually challenge the Administration's assumptions in order to arrive at budget alternatives with the Administration and Board. The comparison you make with Washington is indeed apt in that it reflects the way decisions have slid back to being made in a vacuum and handed down to the voters instead of in a democratic fashion based on budget-to-actuals instead of budget-to-budget figures combined with the practice of over-reserving for expense items while under-estimating revenues. Although the Board did indeed reach out to me and 2 others asking for suggestions, when we re-iterated our request for an open meeting format to include other financially savvy community members, these requests were consistently ignored. Which is why we are in the current position we are in having to decide on Tues on a tax levy cap-busting budget requiring 60% super-majority. Which the public will decide, of course, and we will live with the consequences: either it passes, or the Board and Administration will be forced to rein in the excesses. And much as I love open debate, I restate that online posting leaves does leave a lot to be desired. Let's continue to share, but not face-to-face. Respectfully - Sonny
Jon Satran May 18, 2013 at 12:16 am
Sonny, I like the idea of brainstorming together, thinking outside of the box, but there are someRead More major obstacles that I think you need to consider: 1) A Bond referendum requires a 45 days’ notice period. It cannot be presented for a vote before this year's budget process is concluded. 2) To release reserves based on the hope that a future bond vote would be successful is reckless. What happens if reserves are released and then the bond referendum fails? You would not risk your home finances with this type of risk, would you really risk your school’s financial health? 3) Our tax certiorari reserve was just recently reviewed in consultation with our attorneys and we are appropriately reserved for today’s commercial real estate market. 4) Most importantly, this proposal would create a larger and tougher tax increase next year. In other words, adding $1,000,000 of revenue this year through a loan would require replacing that revenue with an additional $1,000,000 again next year and the year after. Borrow and spend economics does not work as we have seen from the national level. Deficit spending, which has been suggested may or may not work in Washington, but it certainly does not in Briarcliff Manor. When the school’s reserves are exhausted, we will face impactful program cuts or much larger tax levy increases. Respectfully - Jon Satran
Sonny (Louis) Linder May 17, 2013 at 02:23 pm
Thanks for the insight. I would encourage all interested parties to weigh in on these importantRead More issues.
JanFisher May 17, 2013 at 10:55 pm
It is so wonderful that, recognizing the importance of STEM and following the recommendation of ourRead More educators, Sal Maglietta and Jon Satran agreed to bring on the district's first director of instructional technology.
McKey Rivers May 10, 2013 at 07:36 pm
Thank you Dr. Sternberg for your thoughtful letter. You hit on an important facet of this electionRead More few if any others have stated: electing Mr. Wasserman and/or Mr. Linder will provide the added benefit of diversity of thought as the Board continues to address difficult, ongoing educational and financial issues. There is a woeful absence of synergy produced by articulation of different views among the current Board members. The absence of a “check and balance” on the current Board is reflected in the inexplicable decision to cancel the May 13 BOE meeting (scheduled since last summer), which is the last meeting prior to the May 21 budget vote and board election. Is there no business for the Board to conduct at this critical juncture or could it be that the Board does not want Briarcliff residents to hear members of the community question the Board about the proposed budget right before the election? Electing either Mr. Linder and/or Mr. Wasserman will immediately benefit the public as the highest vote getter will be seated on May 22 and thus participate in formulating a second budget for public vote that, notwithstanding current BOE scare tactics, can be tax levy compliant and not involve additional program elimination or reduction. There is no doubt that electing Mr. Wasserman and/or Mr. Linder to the Briarcliff School Board will substantially benefit the entire Briarcliff community and provide a much needed check on Board decision making.
Herman Sexton May 10, 2013 at 03:48 pm
Electing Paul Wasserman alone would add a diversity of thought. The guy hears at least a dozenRead More voices in his head. Have you ever spoken to him? Did you pay attention when he was running for Congress for a few weeks? Ugh.
W Obermeyer May 10, 2013 at 03:41 pm
Not too diffiicult to play with figures. Look at the budget decrease and the increase in state aid,Read More then claim the budget is actually less.
Mike Valenti May 1, 2013 at 04:50 pm
Second, Mr. Sternberg comments “The previous Board reversed that trend but now a new schoolRead More Board reversed that and we are back to square one.” This is without question factually and ideologically incorrect. The previous Board, populated by Janet Marinaccio, Guy Rotundo, Eric Bashford and Rosella Ranno, were sponsored by the folks in our District who are of the fiscal conservative/tea-party-like taxation ideology. Yes, they aggressively cut the school budget over the course of their term. However, this year’s school budget is actually lower than last years. So, to suggest that the current Board has reversed tack on this issue is factually incorrect.
Mike Valenti May 1, 2013 at 04:49 pm
I commend Mr. Sternberg for his thoughtful, well written letter. However, I must take issue withRead More several of his points. First, he offers an analysis of various interests in our District and their motives regarding our school budget. If I may, here is another more simplified viewpoint. The predominance of District residents moved here for the school district (whether for its value to their children or its value for their real estate). These folks have a very supportive ideology with respect to taxation in support of the District. On the other side of the ledger stands a group who has a fiscal conservative, tea-party-like taxation ideology. They seek to cut, cut, cut with disregard to the integrity and depth of the educational program and resources. (continued)...