Talk:Cleft lip and palate

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Nose

I don't know details, but doesn't a cleft lip often cause a misshapen nose as well? (a quick google search seems to imply this). Should this information be incorporated? - Matthew0028 08:04, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

Cleft happens in the lip and/or roof of the mouth. However, since the nose is close to the lip, the nose might look deformed too. Two sided complete lip cleft often makes it appear that the tissue between the nostrils is completely seperated. A one sided cleft lip might cause a slightly bent nose because the tissue stress 'pulls' the nose to one side. Once the lip is closed by surgery the nose is in these cases usually also corrected. Felsir 07:31, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
I have a cleft and a Deviated Septum which I'm having an operation on in the coming days, and I was lead to belive that this is a common occurance amoung people with clefts.
My nose was definately deformed by the lack of bony support in the palate... I have had many surgeries correcting this. The separation between the sides tends to pull the nose off center in a unilateral cleft, and mine slanted into my cheek, making it more of a flat button than the protruding normal nose my children have.Jessica Munoz 15:02, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wives' tale

I heard that the term "hare lip" was derived from an old wives' tale where if a pregant woman encountered a hare, the congenital defect would result in her baby.

[edit] CleftClub SPAM

If you are looking for more information about cleft lip and palate, then visit CleftClub.com.


Material removed - advertising not allowed, thanks

All references to CleftClub.com should be removed. The site has been hacked.

[edit] Cosmeric murder, as in cleft-based abortion

Added info and link about cleft abortion <--> eugenics isssue.

[edit] merger suggestion

I suggest to merge Cleft lip and Cleft palate to a new article called cleft and have lip and palate articles redirect. I'm busy updating these articles and find that almost 95% of the information is valid for both articles. From a medical point of view lip and palate are the same deformity, it only describes the severity of the cleft. Cause, Biology, Treatment, Complications etc are almost identical. Felsir 14:32, July 18, 2005 (UTC)

I will move them for you. -SV|t 15:25, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:Cleft palate

[edit] Causes: relations to drugs, alcohol etc instead of genetics

Cleft runs in my family (my wife and two sons have it, my daughter has not) so I did a lot of reading on the subject and I have many contacts within the cleft community. I want to mention that cleft is mainly the result genetics. While it is true that smoking, drugs and alcohol are certainly bad for the development of children during pregnancy, it is not the major cause of cleft. These 'habits' are bad for pregnancies in general. In numbers: if one of the parents have cleft, the odds increase to about 7%. If two relatives have cleft odds increase further to 15% (where 0.3% is for 'regular people') Smoking increases the odds from 0.3% to ~0.8%. While smoking increases other factors (low weight at birth) with much higher numbers.

The genetic factor is confirmed in many international studies under large population of families with cleft (in fact, my family took part in such research in a combined effort of Dutch and German universities).

I feel the article should inform people about the genetic factor and warn people that smoke, drug, alcohol is bad for pregnancy in general. The article now over emphasises drug abuse etc that I find it offensive to people who didn't smoke/drink but have children with cleft.

Material above dump merged from talk:cleft palate. -SV|t 15:34, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Joaquin Phoenix

Doesn't Joaquinn Phoenix also have a Cleft? I thought it might be suitable to add to the list of famous people.

Clarified the scar on Joaquins lip. It is not really cleft but has some relation to it. Felsir 07:24, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Sorry,but after looking at his photos carefully I am sure that was a cleft (true, one of the "lighter" cases like Cheech Martins). However, it looks like mr. Phoenix doesnt want for rest of the world to know whar really happened to him on birth so I think it would be better not to mention him among famous people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.150.77.231 (talk) 22:00, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

The form of cleft on mr. Phoenix lip is a microform. So yes it is a type of cleft. He has been quoted a few times saying that he was born with the scar but never had surgery for it (which is possible with a microform) (example quote). Felsir (talk) 07:22, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Causes of Cleft Lip/Palate

The statement, "The cause of cleft lip and cleft palate formation is genetic in nature." is only partly true, and should be modified or deleted. In medical research, the cause is really still in debate, but is recognized to be complicated. Some clefts occur apart from any other abnormality, and some occur along with syndromes. There are over 250 developmental syndromes associated with clefts, and some of these are a result from a single gene condition. The other clefts associated with syndromes are believed to be caused by chromosomal anomalies or are idiopathic (in other words, no known specific cause can be found). On the other hand, these clefts associated with syndromes only account for 3% - 8% of all cleft cases. The rest of these "isolated" cleft cases have causes that are not completely known and are undergoing research. Nonetheless, from what is currently known, tobacco smoking during pregnancy is one factor associated with cleft formation in the developing fetus.

Therefore, I suggest the article change the statement I referred to earlier to incorporate the fact that the causes of clefts include, at least, major genes, minor genes, and environmental factors. A statement that not all researchers in this field completely agree on a clear cause may also be appropriate.

In regards to what was said earlier about environmental causes stated in the article being offensive to those who never smoke/drank alcohol but had children with clefts, I think that the potential of some being offended is not as important as having correct information stated in the article. And anyways, almost every step in growth and development is affected by genetic and environmental factors. With a condition as complex as this, the article would be best to include the current scientific belief that all cases of clefts cannot be explained solely by genetics. -Dozenist talk 02:50, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

  • Fully recognizing that I know very little about the science of clefts, I think the above comments make a very good case for changing the article in the recommended way. I support the change. Regarding the potential for offense: how is it offensive to say that clefts can be caused by a variety of factors, one or two of which might be disagreeable to a particularly sensitive person? In any case, wouldn't offsetting the supposedly offensive cause by presenting all of the other potential (and also unknown) causes address the potential for abusive and unnecessary offense? - Jersyko talk 03:58, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
  • I forgot to mention (but I was reminded this morning at school) that an appropriate term applied to cleft lip and palate is that the condition is "multi-factoral," referring of course to the many factors involved in its cause.-Dozenist talk 01:32, 1 December 2005 (UTC)


I feel that I have to make a comment here (I stated in an earlier post to find it 'offensive'). First let me explain why I made that comment in the first place. At the time I made the comment, the article looked like it stressed the drug/alcohol factors too much. Basically the drug/alcohol factors were stated at the same level as genetic factors. To me (at the time), it looked as if the article told readers to think "he there is a kid with cleft, their parents must be either drunk or drug addicts". (I will not deny that it is possible that personal emotion (3 family members with cleft) influenced this line of thought).
Now, cleft is indeed multi-factoral, and yes, alcohol and drugs are factors. However, this can be said for nearly any deformity formed during pregnancy. Drugs and alcohol are bad for pregnancies in general. The genetic specialists in our craniofacial team has been participating in a large scale research (cooperation between several dutch and german hospitals with cleft treatment teams) told me that the research confirmed that smoking increased the odds from 0.3% to ~0.8%, while having one family member increases the odds from 0.3% to 7%-10%. So yes, smoking is a factor but it is not as significant as the genetics. The reason while it is "muti-factoral" is because one can have a child with cleft while there is no genetic cause apparent. Therefore other factors must be in play. Unfortunately I can't find the research published on the Internet so it is hard to cite this source. I will ask next time I am at the hospital (which is probably soon, my youngest son's lip will be closed within a few weeks). Felsir 07:42, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
I also read an article last week about clefting and twins. It does occur with identical twins (one fertilized egg) that one of them has some form of clefting while the other twin has none - indicating it is not entirely genetic. The article was in a newsletter for parents with twins so it didn't delve deeper into the subject of the cleft. Felsir 09:05, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
Found an online version of the newsletter in dutch language: [1] (pdf ~27mb in size. See pdf-page 8) Felsir 10:46, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Submucosal Cleft Palate - or Hidden Cleft Palate

This should be introduced also. Many individuals have this without knowing it until it is found by chance by an Ear Nose Throat doctor examining a patient for a possible tonsillectomy or if hyper nasal speech is realized.

[edit] Cleft lip and palate in the dog

I would like to add some info about clefts in dogs and other animals, which are a common condition. Would it be better to start a separate article for this? I also have some photos of a cleft lip and palate in a Boxer. --Joelmills 02:23, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

It depends how much info you have. If you have a lot of information, then a small section in this article and an indepth independent article on the subject would be appropriate. If it is only a little information, then having it in this article as a separate section would be reasonable. And make sure you upload photos of the dog's cleft lip and palate, even if they are not included in this article!!! - Dozenist talk 02:32, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

It's just a little info, so I'll add it to this article. And I misspoke, the pictures I have are of a boxer with a cleft lip and a small cleft in the premaxilla, but the dog does not have a true cleft palate (as you'll see). --Joelmills 03:15, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Nonetheless, the dog with a cleft lip would make a striking photo. - Dozenist talk 03:29, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Common treatment schedule

I'm working on a common treatment table, see my first attempt here: User:Felsir/clefttable. Besides the required translation (I can do that myself), I cant get the first row to align correctly... if anyone could assist, itis appreciated. Would such a table fit the article (treatment section)? personally think it is informative and shows there is more to it than just surgery. The timetable is based on the common treatment schedule in the etherlands, I have seen virtually the same schedules on UK and US sites (can't provide links at the moment, as I am typing this from a terminal in a hospital with limited I-access) Felsir 16:49, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Removed image(s)

Certian images have been removed by me because they have been added to a category that makes them speediable, most likely Category:Images with no copyright tag. Kilo-Lima|(talk) 16:43, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article name

I've never heard of a cleft lip or cleft palate being referred to as just a "cleft". Additionally, the word "cleft" does not exclusively refer to cleft lips or palates. I realize, based on Stevertigo and Felsir's discussion, above, that this current article name represents a compromise. However, instead of having separate "cleft lip" and "cleft palate" articles, or one "cleft" article, we should perhaps have one "cleft lift or palate" article. Thoughts? JonathanFreed 00:59, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Choose the more popular one, redirect the other, and use redirects and disambiguations to their full extent.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus  talk  21:54, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article Title and General Comments

I have recently become aware of the Cleft entry because I teach a graduate course in cleft palate and craniofacial disorders. [A speech-language pathologist, I am a member of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial organization, serve as a reviewer for the Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal, pbublished in the field, and have worked both clinically and in a research capacity.]

The field of cleft lip and palate and craniofacial disorders is quite expansive, due to the engagement of multiple disciplines. I thus see great potential for all aspects of this entry to expand (e.g., surgery -- including the nose; embryology; genetics; diagnostic procedures; speech therapy; dental management; ear disease; reimbursement; associated anomalies; and others to be added (e.g., feeding a baby with a cleft; learning disabilities/cognitive disabilities associated with some cleft types; facial clefting; diagnostic techniques). These areas can expand by adapting content from respected textbooks, consensus statements, and parent educational publications already developed by experts in the field -- as well as by reference to evidence-based research.

The transmission of this information requires a highly nuanced and balanced approach, and there is great need this content, globally. I am thus beginning to communicate with members of the professional community to direct their energies toward this entry. However, it will take some time to get mobilized, and require initial planning to reconsider the organization and categorization schema. There is another entry (Craniofacial Team) that is also a bit out of balance, and needs some work as well.

In the meantime, I respectfully request that the readers of this discussion consider changing the name of the entry from Cleft. A cleft can refer to a musical term, a dimple in the chin, or part of a medical term. It is never used as a title fpr a reference article.

In Wikipedia this occurs often, for example Ocean commonly refers to the bodies of water found on earth, however it is also a comic book, a train and a gospel band. If the concensus is that cleft is not the correct name for the article, the reason cannot be because 'cleft' is also a musical term (which actually it is not; the musical term is clef). Felsir 23:23, 28 July 2006 (UTC)


Cleft Palate; Cleft Lip and Palate; Cleft Palate - Craniofacial (as per the Cleft Palate- Craniofacial Journal and the American Cleft Palate -Craniofacial Association) I'd yield to a professional committee's consensus if they ultimately enter this discussion and suggest a different term than my preference, but for now, urge a name change to one of the three above, as suggested by the above discussant. Ellen Cohn

My preference would be Cleft Lip and Palate. As stated in a discussion message above it could easily be linked so 'cleft' would redirect to the new name (see flu it redirects to the correct term influenza). One has to look at it from two ways:
A) this is an encyclopedia so information should be correct and factual (so the article's name should be correct)
and
B) this is an encyclopedia so people must be able to look things up (and therefore the layman term should be included to enable people to find information: if there only was an article named Norma Jeane Mortenson then few people would find Marilyn Monroe).
So what is the correct name? There obviously is not a single correct one. Cleft palate and Cleft lip both redirect to this article so those two are covered. If this article is renamed cleft lip and palate it is both correct and understandable. Felsir 23:23, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
If we move the article, then we have to deal with the technical question whether cleft should redirect to Cleft (disambiguation) or to 'cleft palate or something' article, with that article displaying a disambig note Cleft redirects here. For other meanings see Cleft (disambiguation) (note this can be done with Template:Redirect). I would recommend redirecting cleft into a disambig, as we should use a more specific term throughout articles (that means we should go over 'what links here' and make bypass the disambig, of course). As for the particular name, not being a specialist here, as a layman (i.e. as most people who will read this entry) I would thinkt that cleft lip and palate is the most logical name, combining both cleft lip and cleft palate redirects, and hopefully satysfing supporters of both names. Last but not least it is encouraging to see professionals taking interest in Wikipedia, I think we are all looking forward to their contributions.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  00:28, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

I personally think that the solution will be to rename this article to cleft lip and palate, and having cleft either be a disambig or a redirect to this article. The subjects of cleft lip and cleft palate would have to be introduced/summarized in this article, and then the majority of the article would be about when both appear together. Once the information in this article becomes more complete, I would imagine the sections dealing solely with cleft lip and the section dealing with cleft palate will be extensive enough to branch out into their respective articles. - Dozenist talk 03:45, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Now I think of it, in dutch there is one name schisis (derived from Greek for 'gap') that acts as a collective word for cleft lip and palate. So one speaks of a child with schisis and the type would be lipspleet (cleft lip) and/or gehemeltespleet (cleft palate). I was wondering if such word also existed in english? Felsir 08:39, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Clever concept, Felsir! I hope that when we finally get the Cleft entry in shape, it can be translated into other languages.

I also like Dozenist's approach to the naming issue. (Your wikipedia work is superb in dentristy! As you probably already know, children with cleft lip =/- palate have multiple dental issues, and often require several dental specialists. Hope you will watch over those sections as they develop, and perhaps write a bit...) --Ecohn 03:08, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Cleft lip and palate seems to have general approval for the name of this article I suggest moving it immediately. (Bouncingmolar 03:45, 17 February 2007 (UTC))

[edit] Palatal obturator move to own article?

A palatal obturator is an often used prosthesis in cleft palate treatment. The article however states "Palatal obturator is needed by individuals with cleft palate, those who have had tumors removed or have had traumatic injuries to their palate." thus the prosthesis is not exclusive to cleft treatment. This makes it a valid entry for a new article IMHO. The cleft article could include a brief section about the obturator and point to this new detailed article. Opinions? Felsir 17:50, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Sure, let's create an entry on palatal obturator if we have enough content. At the very list, a redirect is needed.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  20:42, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
I moved the section to a new article palatal obturator. I think someone needs to review the new article for readability. I mean the sections are well written, but it contains a lot of medical jargon so it's not entirely clear to the average reader what it actually is (which defeats the purpose of an encyclopedia IMHO). Felsir 08:58, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
For starters we can stick {{technical}} on the talk, and hopefully this will attract more attention from somebody who can help with that.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  13:55, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Is it getting out of control now?

Let me start by saying this: I welcome all new editors to add valuable content to Wikipedia's articles. However, things are getting out of hand in this article. The Craniofacial team section is transformed from a simple basic explaination to a huge chunk of text (copied and pasted as it starts with "Cleft lip+/- palate is a congenital disorder of the craniofacial complex that occurs early during pregnancy and is present at birth" which is basically what the entire article is about). There is an entry craniofacial team that deals about the specifics of the team. The chunk of text would perhaps be more relevant in that article. The text needs to be reviewed for technical details (similar to the palatal obturator text). The same thing applies to the sections about Pharyngeal flap surgery. The surgery should be mentioned in the treatment section with a brief description what it actually is, if it warrants three subsections (including the procedure's history) it's also better to move it to an article of its' own (now it appears to be very a important aspect of cleft treatment while it's not required in many of the cases). The cleft article seems to move from informative to a medical textbook. I'm leaning towards removing those sections as they are obviously copied from medical papers (I believe it's also agains the Wikipedia guidelines - however I can't find the specifics at the moment). I really welcome any professional to add information, but please do so in the spirit of the article, not just to plainly dump information in an articly adding sections without looking at the bigger picture. Am I overreacting? Felsir 12:51, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Please note that the recent expantion of this article is a result of this SUP activity. As such, I am sure the additions are not 'copies from medical papers', but proper papers themselves, referenced and with no OR. Unfortunately the studends have relatively little previous experience with Wikipedia, so even after few hours or instruction on 'how to' and stress on doing the Wikipedia:Tutorial, we still end up with lots of unwikified text and issues like reference sections in the middle of articles. I agree that there has been too much material added here, and some of it is too technical - certainly way above the level of general audience (especially in unwikified parts, with few interlinks to technical jargon). Still, I believe we can deal with this: we know how to copyedit the article, and added material is valuable.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  13:45, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm sorry I was not aware of this, thank you for clearing things up. So perhaps I was overreacting ;-) I do agree the information is valuable - it's why I didn't remove it but added my remarks to the talk page instead. As I said, I do welcome any valuable addition. I will review the sections later and move some parts to new articles where apropiate. Felsir 17:33, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pharyngeal flap surgery

I made four sketches based on what I know of the surgery. Perhaps these need to be checked (my drawings look similar to ones I found using Google, but still). Now I think of it, the surgery is not part of the cleft repair in itself - it is closely related, but as far as I know it is only used to correct the speech. The majority of the cases where the surgery is applied is probably cleft palate, but it is not exclusive to cleft palate. Also people with a cleft palate do not alway require this surgery. Therefore I feel that this section would best have it's own article. Felsir 09:39, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I moved the section to it's own article: Pharyngeal flap surgery. I am not sure what entries in the references section in the cleft article should move also.Felsir 09:16, 8 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Concerns about the photo of the young boy

The photo is unrepresentative. It depicts an unrepaired unilateral cleft lip in a young boy; most cleft lips, at least in the US, are repaired at 10 weeks of age. The individual with the cleft also appears to be African American --the racial group with the lowest incidence. There could also be serious confidentiality/consent issues if the family did not sanction inclusion of the photo. I believe the photo should either be removed, or captioned properly. ecohn (—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.131.83.20 (talk • contribs) )

The picture notes that it was taken with the consent of the parents, and although the country is not specified, the photographer is from India, meaning that the photo was likely taken there. I am sure he would be happy to answer further questions.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  08:36, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. Can the term unrepaired (i.e., unrepaired unilateral cleft lip) be added to the caption? Also, it would be good if we could locate an unrepaired cleft in a baby, with a second photo of the repaired result.24.131.83.206 12:59, 31 August 2006 (UTC)ecohn24.131.83.206 12:59, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cleft ...

I am a proud mother of a three year old boy, who is born with a cleft lip and palate on the right side. This we knew before he was born. His doctor told us that 40% of children with cleft do not have any relatives eith cleft but there are known families where cleft seems to be genetical.

Also we have discussed thar possibilities that it might the genes of boys or girls depending on families.

We live in Iceland and here there are 4-8 children every year born with some kind of a cleft. Fortunanetly we have a superb doctor (and other medical staff).

I also have some photos if anyone is interested to see the changes on my boy after the surgeries :) (pardon my english .. getting a little "rusty") —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.197.223.8 (talk • contribs)


I added photo's of my son, if you have photo's of your son feel free to add them. If possible add them in similar fashion so it would be easy for the readers to compare both clefts and the result of surgeries. Felsir (talk) 14:16, 14 December 2007 (UTC)


Dear anon. We welcome all contributions, and if you can share those informative photoes with us to enhance this article, by all means, please do so. Take care and consider registering. You may also be interested in contributing to the Icelandic Wikipedia. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  04:48, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Discrepancies between statistics and the text of the article

The article first gives statistics indicating that Latin Americans display a cleft lip at the second lowest rate among various racial/ethnic groups, and then one of the following sections goes on to state that "[clefting] occur[s] most often among Asians, Latinos and Native Americans." If one takes "Latino" to be the same as "Latin American," which I think is a reasonable interpretation in this case, this discrepancy makes the accuracy of the article very dubious. The same must be said about the statistics which show the Japanese to have either the second lowest rate of clefting (after only African Americans) or else the third highest rate of clefting (after Chinese and North American Indians). Which one is it? Do the Japanese present an especially low rate of clefting or a slightly higher than average rate of clefting? Someone with specialized knowledge in this field needs to review those sections carefully and eliminate any contradictions. Ebizur 09:42, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikiproject Cats/Dogs banners

The "clefting in animal" section is a small part within this article. If the cleft in animals section is expanded it would most probably move to it's own article. While I welcome any additions to the article, I think it's a little weird to have the cats and dogs portal banners up (as it is such a tiny aspect of the article). The bone fracture article doesn't have this tags and yet cats and dogs can have a fractured bone, so should all possible scenarios include the cats/dog banners? On the other hand, clefting also occurs with other mamals, wouldn't it be too much to have banners for all animals where clefting occurs? IMHO this is a case of getting a bit carried away in trying to include too much. Felsir 10:57, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Removed the banners, no response from the Cats/Dogs project group. Felsir 13:42, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I think that this section should be removed to a seperate article asap, even if it is only a stub to be expanded. A top link to "clefting in animals" could be added to ensure readers can access the information easily if this is what they are interested in. It seems to me that the user's interest is likely to be specifically human, or specifically animals. A top link would be much more user-friendly than having to scroll through so much to get to the cats and dogs. On a more personal note, as I have a son with a cleft palate myself, I did a bit of a double-take when I reached this section because my mind was centred on the defect in humans. I realise that this is somewhat irrational, as the pictures are not in any way disturbing, but I believe that many new parents of babies with cleft conditions would access this article with their minds firmly on their personal situation and this may upset them. I only mention this as a secondary consideration, of course, but with good reason to divide the article (imo) this sensitivity is an added benefit. baby_ifritah 12:09, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry that I'm just responding to this now, but I wanted to see how much the animal section could be expanded. I think with work it could be expanded more, so I think it could be a workable separate article. My only concern is that it would lack context, but I guess that could also be solved. I'll wait a little first to see if there are any other comments. --Joelmills 02:19, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Psychosocial issues / Very one Sided

Being born with a Full Bi-Lateral Cleft I found the Psychosocial Issues section to be a bit vauge. (I will work on an article for this) No where was there discussion on the positive aspects of having a cleft. Almost discriminating to a point. Many individuals with Clefts whether full or partial have a very positive and productive social standing throughout their youth, teen, and adult years. It all depends what you see in the mirror. One part discussed which I did appreciate is parental involvment, which is crucial to social development.

Kane 12:40, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Continuing to take medication for the complex PTSD resulting from the combination of surgery, social difficulties and difficulties in self esteem, I would like to see expansion of the information on this issue: both positive and negative outcomes. Jessica Munoz 20:52, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I believe that the "Controversy" section is misleading

The "Controversy" section would lead one to believe that in the UK, cleft palate is a legally sound reason for a late abortion. As cleft palate is repairable and not a "serious handicap", this is clearly not the case. The included BBC link also states this:

Her lawyers argued in the High Court that there should have been further investigations with a view to prosecution, because an abortion could never be justified under the 1967 Abortion Act on the basis that a cleft lip and palate were a serious handicap.

138.243.228.52 15:31, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] African/Black or African-American

Seeing as the racial statistics document Caucasians, Asians and other ethnic demographics, is it not feasible that the African/black demographic is not entirely African-American. It seems to be a term overused, and one used as a means to describe black people from other countries as well as the United States.

I may be wrong, but I get the feeling that in this context, African-American is a term incorrectly used to describe the whole black/African race. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.21.30.93 (talk) 22:43, 22 January 2007 (UTC).

I would like to introduce Chance to Smile, a non-profit student-run organization for cleft lip and palate. On our website, www.chancetosmile.com you can read the latest news on cleft research, learn about our volunteer activities, and much more. We are located in San Antonio, Texas but we hope to reach across the borders. Please show us your support by telling your friends and family about us.

Sincerely,

[edit] External Link removed

Why has someone removed the link to our community website CleftWorld? We offer a free community service and I can't imagine why someone would want to stop others from finding our site.

I just noticed that the deletion was due to the fact that we require registration and also sell t-shirts. Registration is not required for browsing of the site, only for posting - this helps cut down on comment spam and ensures a certain degree of accountability. Through our store we are hoping to cover our ongoing admin and hosting costs. Let me assure you that this site is NOT a money-making venture - I am the father of a 13-month-old cleft lip and palate baby and I set this site up in response to a perceived need for cleft sufferers to be able to connect.

Before deleting please check the content of a site more carefully.

(Ulfstein 11:45, 12 February 2007 (UTC))

Please read WP:SPAM and Wikipedia:External links.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  15:09, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the above pointer but I still don't see why our link should not be included - could you please elaborate.

(Ulfstein 19:44, 12 February 2007 (UTC))

Consider asking the editor who removed the link.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  22:10, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks Piotr, I'll drop him a line. (Ulfstein 23:07, 12 February 2007 (UTC))

[edit] Perhaps a section on Bone grafting could be added?

I'm not too sure on what it's about, so maybe someone who knows more about bone grafting could make the section, but don't some/most people who have clefts eventually have a bone graft from the hip to repair the gum? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.134.167.194 (talk) 01:08, 16 February 2007 (UTC).

This is correct, in some cases bone grafts are taken either from the hip or a rib to graft onto the gums. However, I don't know an awful lot about it - my son may face something along these lines in years to come so I too would welcome more information on this subject. (Ulfstein 04:04, 16 February 2007 (UTC))

Masoud Saman Chance to Smile I would like to introduce Chance to Smile, a non-profit student-run organization for cleft lip and palate. By going to our website, [2], you have access to the latest news on cleft research, and can learn about our programs and missions. We need your support! www.chancetosmile.com

Thank you,

Masoud Saman Chance to Smile

[edit] Move to 'cleft lip and palate' from cleft complete

There is a general consensus in the discussion about the page title that this page would be more appropriately named Cleft lip and palate. I have begun to change the pages that link to this page to refer to Cleft lip and palate in preparation for the move.(Bouncingmolar 03:50, 17 February 2007 (UTC))

The move is now complete, I have also completed moving all redirect pages to cleft lip and palate(Bouncingmolar 04:33, 17 February 2007 (UTC))

Good work. However, when you create a new heading, please do it at the end of the article. Dr. Hannibal Lecter 05:16, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
oh.. sorry. heh i've been doing that all the time.. well i spose i had to learn some time. Cheers (Bouncingmolar 22:29, 17 February 2007 (UTC))
Don't worry, it's fine. Dr. Hannibal Lecter 22:45, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merger from Clefting prevalence in different cultures

The result was No merge.--JEF 15:33, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

This information is an important part of this article I think that it should definately be included in this article as it describes the prevalence of this condition. And so I also re propose that once the merger is complete that the other page be a redirect to this one.Bouncingmolar 22:42, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm not in favor for including the article into this. While I do agree it is valuable information, it is also US-centric. A link to the article might suffice. Felsir 09:01, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree. Also, I think the data set used here is ambiguous and seems US-centric as well. Was it based on global statistics, or US ones? baby_ifritah 12:19, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

[edit] Spam Cleanup

Tested all external links and cleaned up per WP:SPAM. Removed the spam tag. External links should primarily inform, not advertise. Many of the links I deleted seemed to point to very worthwhile charities, but that is beside the point. Wikipedia does not exist as an advertising medium, but as an encyclopedia. Cmichael 04:18, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Diagnosis

I think a brief sentence needs to be added stating that clefts can sometimes be detected with prenatal ultrasound, while others are diagnosed shortly after birth. Logically, this should appear in the opening paragraph. Also, without this information, the "controversy" section lacks perspective. Does anyone have statistics on the proportion of clefts actually diagnosed in utero? baby_ifritah 12:35, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Peyton Manning

I've found no evidence online that NFL Super Bowl winner Peyton Manning had a cleft palate. Is this vandalism? Canuckle 20:44, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Famous people lacking sources

The following people do not mention having a cleft palate in their articles. I've seen cleft palate used as a derogatory term by vandals before. The following people should have this fact sourced or noted in their bio so that we can seperate vandalism from legitimate references.

Canuckle 16:27, 3 May 2007 (UTC)


There are quite a few websites that claim several of these people as having a cleft lip, but they are most certainly wrong. If you look at pictures of some of these people as young men, particularly Brokaw and Robards, there is simply no way they could have had such a good result (i.e. look THAT good) at the time in history when they would have had corrective surgery. I spoke with a pediatric plastic surgeon and he denied that any of those that I deleted (Manning, Robards, Brokaw, Hamill, Lennox)could likely have had cleft. He was not sure about Jesse Jackson and stated that he has always wondered about him, so I left him in. But there is still no source on Jackson. --Rubergj 01:26, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Microform info needs crucial corrections

To the author of this page: Please correct the information on Microform Cleft Lip in your article. It is very difficult to find accurate information on MCL, and I would encourage you to make Wikipedia a valid and useful starting point by looking into the following:

1. Although many people, including some doctors, use the terms interchangeably, there is a significant difference between a microform cleft lip and a partial cleft lip. The microform manifests as a scar extending from lip into nostril. It may be accompanied by the characteristic notched vermillion and/or collapsed nostril of complete cleft lips.

The partial cleft, on the other hand, looks like the drawing labeled as such on your page, where there is a notch but no evidence that the clefting ever extended any further.

2. Most importantly, the statement that Microform Cleft Lips do not require surgery is dangerously inaccurate. True,some Microforms can be left uncorrected. However, in many MCL cases the orbicularis oris muscle around the mouth is separated under the external scar. In this case, surgery is necessary just as if a complete cleft existed. A child born with MCL must therefore see a cleft team as soon as possible after birth to ensure that it will be diagnosed early and corrected if necessary during the optimal time period (usually by 4-6 months at the latest). Note that the ability of the baby to feed normally and pucker the lips does not guarantee that the muscle is intact or that no action is necessary.

The common misconceptions of MCL currently reflected in this article have serious affects on families dealing with the issue. My daughter is now 7 months old and she has not had surgery yet, primarily because her doctors have treated her microform just exactly the way this page does: as the same as a partial cleft and as a minor cosmetic issue. She should have had her surgery months ago. Now she will have to endure having her arms restrained during recovery at a time when she should be learning to roll, crawl, etc., and when she is teething, chewing, and runs a much higher risk of popping her stitches and thus scarring more obviously.

Reliable MCL information is very difficult to find online. I am not suggesting that a huge section on it needs to be added here, but I would exhort you to briefly describe the difference between MCL and partial clefting, and to stress that MCL can involve muscle issues that require surgical correction and should be examined by a plastic surgeon without delay.

Thanks, and please pardon any errors in format or common Wikipedia practice. This is my first post here. Cthugabonne 15:27, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the insights. I added some info to the article. In Wikipedia you are alowed to change the article yourself. Be bold! Felsir (talk) 14:34, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] bilateral admixed cleft lip

what is the chacteristic etiologic factor between admixed bilateral cleft lip and bilateral compelet or incompelet cleft lip?????????????? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.53.151.40 (talk) 22:38, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] unclear from the article

When the cleft occurs on the top of the mouth ad some tissue is missing, where does the hole lead? How far "upwards" does it reach? This was unclear from the article. Can somebody clarify this for me and add it to the article? this would be very helpful in understanding the disorder? --169.232.119.231 (talk) 21:19, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

The hole leads into the nasal cavity. Felsir (talk) 14:35, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] One question

What is QOL score? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.150.77.165 (talk) 23:33, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Abbreviation for Quality of Life. --Arcadian (talk) 01:49, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article cleanup, looking for input

Hi, I've started to cleanup the article a bit. I tried to answer questions from this talkpage and include suggestions to improve the article. Any suggestions are appreciated!

Looking for suggestions for the "Velopharyngeal insufficiency" section. It looks a bit out of place. It's not really treatment information, but seems rather to describe the situation that results from a cleft palate. I've been thinking to rewrite it and move the information to the "cleft palate" section instead. What do you think? Felsir (talk) 15:06, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Fixed it, moved part of the text to the cleft palate section (since VPI is closely related to it), also found a main article on the topic so a link to that article gives the reader much more indepth information than a section in this article would (or should). Felsir (talk) 08:51, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm also concidering to divide the treatment in more sections to separate treatments that are repairing the cleft lip and the treatments that deal with cleft palate. The section seems to have a lot of text that looks like it treats the one thing. Suggestions welcomed! Felsir (talk) 15:09, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Moved some text around and created subsections to group treatment texts. I think it looks better this way, feel free to comment! Felsir (talk) 09:05, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Globalization tag

I have removed the globalization tag because it is unexplained. If you think that it's deserved, then please explain your concerns in detail right here on the talk page. This will help other editors figure out how to address your concerns. Thanks, WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:21, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Clefting prevalence in different cultures cleanup

There's a lot of good raw data at the "Clefting prevalence in different cultures" page, but it's very poorly presented. In the discussion page there I've attempted a summary which others may find usefulSnori (talk) 18:19, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] which pharyngeal arches?

which pharyngeal arch is involved? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.151.227.42 (talk) 00:53, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Is it only branchial arch 1? or 1 and 2?
Or is it 1 and 3? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.151.227.42 (talk) 01:03, 4 June 2008 (UTC)