[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
February 26, 1955


JAMA. 1955;157(9):748-749. doi:10.1001/jama.1955.02950260054016

This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.


To the Editor:—  There is much misinformation published about the Rh factor and its behavior. In the Oct. 23, 1954, issue of The Journal, page 772, in an editorial entitled "Antenatal Rh Antibody Tests," it was stated: "If a significant rise in titer occurs during the pregnancy, this is definite proof that the fetus in utero is Rh positive, and an erythroblastotic baby is to be expected, even though the father may be heterozygous." This statement is not only misleading, it is incorrect. A man, heterozygous for the Rh factor, married to an Rh-negative woman, can be the father of either Rh-negative or Rh-positive children. Only Rhpositive babies are affected by the common anti-Rh0 (anti-D) antibodies from the mother. Neither a high Rh antibody titer in the mother nor a rising titer proves that the child will be Rh positive. At present there is no known method for

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview