Posted on 03/17/2011 7:18:13 PM PDT by Spudx7
A baby girl has been kept away from her mother for almost five years after she refused to sign a form consenting to a Caesarean section - even though she did not end up needing to have the operation. The extraordinary case began after staff at a New Jersey hospital claimed that refusal to give permission for the procedure amounted to child abuse. The agonising decision triggered
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1366791/Baby-girl-kept-away-mother-5-years-refusing-sign-C-section-form.html#ixzz1Gug0oL97
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Here’s something you won’t see in the USA news ....
This story made my jaw drop. I hadn’t heard of it previously and keep thinking there must be more going on than what’s covered here.
We had an ob-jerk try to force us into a C-section with our first child back in 1984—trying to schedule it SIX weeks in advance. Must have had some serious golf dates lined up.
After switching doctors we found that the original ob-jerk had placed comments in our file that we were “irresponsible” and posed a “high risk” of abuse.
Did you get that file when you switched doctors? Did the new doctor take it out?
“Despite the medical opinion that the foetus demonstrated signs of distress and that the procedure was necessary to avoid imminent danger to the foetus, the child was born by vaginal delivery without incident”
So the doctor should be sued for malpractice
I wonder if he could be sued for slander.
I am very confused with this one. Technically, this woman could have aborted her baby and that is “choice”. She wants to deliver naturally and refused a C-section and that makes it abuse? Perhaps there is more to the story but if there isn’t, this is one frightening case.
Our OB was great, I had to have a c-secion or both baby and I would have bled out had I gone into labor. I’ve had 5 babies & 3 docs, I am disgusted that any doc would push for a risky procedure when it wasn’t necessary.
What malpractice?
I know, it is very confusing, I keep thinking that there must be more. This happened 5 years ago and she STILL doesn’t have her daughter back. If this is the whole story, it is horrifying.
He gave the dangerously incorrect opinion that “the procedure was necessary to avoid imminent danger to the foetus”.
His professional opinion would have caused a potentially highly damaging procedure to be carried out, and has resulted in this action.
If the doctor knew something was terribly wrong and HAD to perform a C to save a baby and the woman refused resulting in the baby’s death then I would say child abuse (maybe). However, the regular delivery had no complications and nothing happened to the child. A normal delivery. Seems to me that the doctor was WRONG and the woman is being punished for not agreeing?! This is a very strange one indeed!
Fascinating. You know, pro-lifers could put the shoe on the other foot with this one, by pointing out that women who have abortions are “irresponsible” and pose a “high risk” of abuse...
Sounds like a union doctor. That is the type of adversarial attitude you get with government union workers.
Truly evil acts are not at all rare when low IQ ‘crats are given unlimited authority.
Bottom line: 1. Evil will occur to children.
2. Government can’t prevent it.
3. Allowing government goober to attempt to
prevent abuse always causes more abuse.
The Founders did not allow government any powers in these areas for a good reason. Those reasons are as valid now as when they were written.
There are some things government CAN”T DO SUCCESSFULLY ! ! !
This is called kidnapping and the judge and every other bureaucrat involved should be charged, convicted and incarcerated.
Agree completely.
The mother presented with some risk being 42 years old, and baby was in distress. The mother refused O2, refused the fetal heart monitor and was thrashing about so much so that the epidural [which she requested] could not be administered. She called the police saying that she was being abused and denied treatment.. While you pitched this as an "every mom during delivery" moment the doctors were suspecting this woman of psychiatrically decompensating [she had been treated for 15 years for PTSD/schizoaffective disorder/bipolar disorder] and the baby was in distress. I can completely understand their judgement to try and deliver this baby in the safest and least chaotic way.BOTH parents claimed the mother had never received psychiatric treatment, denied that they refused a c-section, and denied that they had ever been seen by a hospital psychiatrist. In fact, she was being evaluated by a hospital psychiatrist to determine her capacity for making an informed decision when she gave birth.
The father has refused to interact with DYFS, to get the assessments requested by the court, or to attend parenting classes so that the child can be returned to him.
While we acknowledge that the judge, in fact, did rely, in part, on such refusal in his findings of abuse and neglect, we are of the view that there was substantial additional evidence of abuse and neglect that supported the ultimate findings. Our view is consistent with DYFS’ acknowledgement at oral argument that the judge need not have considered V.M.’s refusal on the merits of the issue of abuse or neglect. DYFS did assert, as well, that the judge could consider V.M.’s refusal and her later claim that she did not refuse, as these statements relate to her credibility. As we have stated, the independent evidence presented, irrespective of the evidence concerning V.M.’s resistance to the c-section, amply supported the judge’s ultimate finding as to V.M., and we affirm as to her. As to B.G., we reverse for the reasons set forth in the concurring opinion.The appeals court argued that there were substantial reasons unrelated to the refusal of the c-section.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.