gentlemaitresse: Woman Delivers Stillborn, Charged With M

The Tease (

gentlemaitresse) wrote,
@ 2004-03-11 20:11:00

Woman Delivers Stillborn, Charged With Murder

Once again, if a woman refuses a cesarean she's in trouble with the law, yet a woman can choose to abort her unwanted unborn baby. I don't understand that contradiction.

Thanks to

tamago23 for pointing this out.

(Post a new comment)

	butterflysneeze 2004-03-11 05:34 pm UTC (link)
	While still on difficult/gray ground, this one is more troubling in that the woman made a choice apparently for cosmetic reasons. Legally wrong? I'm not sure. Morally? Absolutely. (Reply to this)(Thread)

gentlemaitresse
2004-03-11 05:41 pm UTC (link)

Cosmetic reasons? Saying you don't want to be cut open doesn't imply it's strictly for cosmetic reasons, at least not in my mind. And the only quote we have from the mother is second-hand and obviously biased, anyway.

I refused to go to the hospital when my baby was breech because they would have automatically performed a cesarean. Most breeches can easily be delivered vaginally if people have any clue what they're doing. Nobody has a right to tell a mother how to have her baby. I didn't "murder" my baby by refusing medical intervention, and I would not appreciate the insinuation that my choice was morally wrong.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	butterflysneeze 2004-03-11 06:25 pm UTC (link)
	Search around for this story -- there was more information in other versions. (Reply to this)(Parent)

momgoddess
2004-03-11 06:34 pm UTC (link)

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/a/2004/03/11/national1649EST0799.DTL

This is where it says her only motivation was to avoid a scar. But I find that a little hard to believe. But people assume that that could be the only reason, that is totally biased information. Most people can't comprehend someone that thinks for themself and could do something against 'medical advice'. It's too threatening....just like the woman who refused a cesarean and gave birth to a healthy baby vaginally after they told her the baby would die if she didn't. One circumstance, the mother was wrong. So now it's murder. People who go against the mainstream get in trouble.

Or as Dave Matthews sings in Typical Situation...

"Why are you so different, why are you that way? If you don't get in line we'll lock you away"

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

gentlemaitresse
2004-03-12 05:14 am UTC (link)

just like the woman who refused a cesarean and gave birth to a healthy baby vaginally after they told her the baby would die if she didn't

That has happened numerous times, but it usually only makes the local news. I specifically remember a case in GA, and I have read others over the years. They always give birth to healthy babies afterward, but the first time a "fetus" (which is now called a "baby" to make a case for murder) dies it makes national news.

The woman made a decision regarding her own body. She didn't want to be cut open, and I can't blame her. There are risks involved in major abdominal surgery. It's horrible that her baby died. Right now she may be grieving while at the same time feeling very defensive regarding the decision she made. Now we get to watch our "justice" system drag her through the wringer and make her look like a monster.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

redselchie
2004-03-11 09:56 pm UTC (link)

my mother had five children, four were breech and delivered vaginally, normally with no complications- except for one of my brothers, who was sitting in a buddha position and had trouble with his legs for awhile.

But the trouble is, now, no one is trained in how to deliver breech babies. When I was going through nursing school, 20 *years* ago, there was one doctor who still did them and everytime he would deliver one, the room would be crowded by people wanting to see how it was done, it was so rare.

Now, it's a matter of liability. Sadly we live in a society where so many are so eager to sue, and it really has ended up hurting us by limiting our choices. The doctors really have no other choice than to do what is the safest way to do things. To do otherwise, they risk loosing their license and their ability to practice altogether.

The simple answer to your question, why would this be considered murder, and abortion not be, is that it is a matter of viability. An embryo that is 8 - 12 weeks old is not viable, but a term fetus, is. That's why third trimester abortions are such a hot issue - the fetuses generally ARE viable.

There are no simple answers to these questions, of course. Nor do I think we will ever come up with a definitive answer - which is why I believe it is imperative that we leave these decisions up to the woman and her health care provider.

If you were wondering, I was the only one born normally ::grin:::

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

gentlemaitresse
2004-03-12 05:06 am UTC (link)

The doctors really have no other choice than to do what is the safest way to do things.

Doctors really have no choice than to do *something*. To do *something* is better than to do nothing, even if doing nothing would be safer. This is why we *still* have doctors that will give mothers a prescription for antibiotics when their child has sniffles (although more often these days perhaps they are giving Dimetapp instead). This is why doctors will intervene in an otherwise normal labor and delivery, too. If they get sued it looks better for them to say, "I did everything I could", even if it would have been better to do nothing.

Cesareans are not safer than vaginal delivery for breech births. The best thing one can do in an otherwise normal breech birth is to keep your hands off! Let the baby come on its own, and only assist if it becomes necessary. Of course, you'd have to know a thing or two about what "necessary" looks like and what to do at that time, but that could be learned by reading a few paragraphs in a book.

why would this be considered murder, and abortion not be, is that it is a matter of viability

That doesn't explain why third trimester abortions are legal. The thing is, as long as we go to a doctor for something it seems to be socially acceptable. As soon as we make decisions for ourselves and manage our own health we are in trouble. How dare we not adhere to "doctor's orders"!

Healthcare is like a religion, and the doctors are the high priests with their secret knowledge and their own language and their temples that smell like medicine rather than incense.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

redselchie
2004-03-12 05:46 am UTC (link)

Of course, you'd have to know a thing or two about what "necessary" looks like and what to do at that time, but that could be learned by reading a few paragraphs in a book.
There is nothing simple about delivering a breech baby, and it certainly can't be learned by reading a few paragraphs in a book. For one, there are several different positions a baby can be in to be considered breech, and it's a matter of knowing how to manipulate the baby on the way out so that no physical damage is done. It is, quite complicated in fact. Even with a head down position, if it is turned the wrong way it can be extremely tricky getting the baby out without injuring it.

That doesn't explain why third trimester abortions are legal.
Actually, it does. Until about the last 15 years, until some wonderful research person discovered the benefits of surfactants on an preemie's lungs, the morbidity rate was still pretty high for premature births.

The thing is, as long as we go to a doctor for something it seems to be socially acceptable. As soon as we make decisions for ourselves and manage our own health we are in trouble. How dare we not adhere to "doctor's orders"!
I think if you run into that, you should find a different doctor. There *are* very good doctors who will abide by your health care choices, even if they don't agree with you. They aren't nearly the ogres they are made out to be, simply people trying to do the best they can, just like the rest of us.

And yes, this is coming from a nurse who's taught childbirth classes, privately as well as in WIC and school clinics, worked in labor and delivery for years, and had her fair share of run-ins with MD's.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

gentlemaitresse
2004-03-12 09:08 am UTC (link)

it certainly can't be learned by reading a few paragraphs in a book

I disagree. Birth is simple.

there are several different positions a baby can be in to be considered breech, and it's a matter of knowing how to manipulate the baby on the way out so that no physical damage is done

It's best to not manipulate the baby at all unless absolutely necessary. Let gravity and nature do their work.

Even with a head down position, if it is turned the wrong way it can be extremely tricky getting the baby out without injuring it.

That's incorrect. My third baby and first homebirth was posterior. Once again, trust your body and let gravity and nature do the work.

I think if you run into that, you should find a different doctor.

You'd better be sure to do so before they get a court order to force you to do what they say.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

	jenjessebelle 2004-03-12 02:57 pm UTC (link)
	my baby was posterior, and it didnt injure my baby, but it was making me very very weak and sore. to the point where i didnt want to go on. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

gentlemaitresse
2004-03-12 05:24 pm UTC (link)

Oh yeah. My posterior baby was the most difficult. Well, except for the one that made me labor for three days. LOL My posterior baby was my third child and first homebirth. She seriously made me consider going to the hospital a few times during labor, but then I'd ask myself what they could do, and I found that I didn't like the answers. The meds they would have given me would have made me groggy and less able to cope, and that would lead to further interventions. I'm convinced she would have been a cesarean birth if I'd gone to the hospital, for several reasons: posterior, pain meds (causing me to feel less in control, plus I would have then been laid up in bed), meconium in the fluid...

I'm so glad I was able to stick it out at home. It was lovely to snuggle up with her in my own bed immediately after her birth. :-)

(Reply to this)(Parent)

urban_homestead
2004-03-12 08:33 am UTC (link)

The thing is, as long as we go to a doctor for something it seems to be socially acceptable. As soon as we make decisions for ourselves and manage our own health we are in trouble.

This is exactly right. I don't think that the legal impetus here is about the baby at all - if they were genuinely worried about protecting children, they wouldn't be so keen to take the mother away from her living children. This is about citizens making their own health decisions and governments that don't want us thinking for ourselves. With the prescription system and War on Drugs we lost the right to medicate ourselves, with this case it should be clear to everyone that we are losing the right to refuse treatments we find unnecessarily invasive, and now there is a substantial lobby that even wants to ban unhealthy foods. It's all part of the same pattern. How long until it's common to incarcerate pregnant women for eating badly, drinking, or smoking?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	lillabug 2004-03-12 09:20 am UTC (link)
	I agree. All of this makes me very sad. I feel like it's open season on women and children. Makes me feel very helpless that we aren;t seen as fit to ake decisions such as these on our own. What next? (Reply to this)(Parent)

stevenredux
2004-03-11 05:57 pm UTC (link)

Cases like these are used to give fetuses rights which are intended as a wedge in the fight against abortion. Sad and stupid, true.

Thing is, it's all pointless. Abortion in this country is going to be decided on November 2. Rehnquist and O'Connor will be retiring next year or the year after. Whoever wins the election will appoint two Supreme Court justices. Bush wins, we get two pro-life justices and Roe dies. It's just that simple.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

	tamago23 2004-03-11 10:21 pm UTC (link)
	I just wish Kerry wasn't so freakish-looking. I mean, yeah, the guy has my vote because I believe we need to get Bush out of there and start taking back the rights that Bush has been quietly stealing from women during his term. But, man, just looking at Kerry gives me the willies. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	redselchie 2004-03-12 06:01 am UTC (link)
	my daughter had an interesting comment about Kerry- she said he looks like Abe Lincoln. Come to think on it, Lincoln was kinda freakish looking, too. LOL (Reply to this)(Parent)

	lillabug 2004-03-12 09:21 am UTC (link)
	That mug shot is awful. My heart goes out to this woman. (Reply to this)

	kinethra 2007-10-30 04:04 am UTC (link)
	To me, this is no different than people who have siamese twins. The ones who are seperated, and they do it knowing one is going to die. They're never put on trial for murder. When that would be a much more clear cut case of murder, along with the doctors and nurses who did the surgery. But she seems full well screwed, being in Utah and all. (Reply to this)

Mini Sitemap:

Username:		Create an Account Forgot your login? Login w/ OpenID
Password:
	Remember Me
	English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…