For riverheart:

[kyburg]

A US woman who allegedly ignored medical warnings to have a Caesarean section has been charged with murder after one of her twins was stillborn. From the BBC - of course.

eyelid, zpdiduda - the news story claims "a nurse heard -" the defendent claim this or that. Last time I checked, that was heresay. It still is, isn't it?

I expect this to fall apart if the charting wasn't done exactly to spec, if this is the evidence they plan to present. Doctor, I hope you charted that you advised a caesarean section and she refused it.

The woman'd had two sections prior? Looking at the picture, I'd say the woman has enough children, don't you?

And she has a husband, right? So far, nobody would know one way or the other. Anybody from Utah want to lay odds on whether or not HE had something to say about it?

Much discussion, indeed.

Comments

[bigbigtruck.livejournal.com]

Does a C-section involve an incision from breastbone to pubic bone? Most I've seen have a "U" shaped incision near the bottom of the belly.

[kyburg.livejournal.com]

Not that I've EVER heard - and I worked with both doctors and nurses who did those procedures day in and day out - my company made the monitoring equipment.

Biggest incision is usually done in extreme cases (think conjoined twins) and while vertical, normally isn't from sternum to pubic bone. I've heard of emergency surgeries where they didn't have a clue what was up (think bowel obstruction or aortic hernia) that were that big -

Run of the mill C-section is usually a "bikini" cut across the lower abdomen between the pelvic bones, horizontally and can be covered very nicely with a swimsuit bottom.

If she has had two c- sections

[turandot.livejournal.com]

Then she couldn't have possibly said that she would be cut from breast to hip bone. She would know better than that. Any wagers on whether the off cuff remark was more or less partly the nurse's invention, out of misplaced anger for the loss?

And yeah, something like a c-section is usually almost always discussed with both partners anyway. I doubt a father to be wouldn't have taken a warning like that seriously.

WTF??

[dwinghy.livejournal.com]

Wait a minute. This woman has at least 3 children... one of whom is a newborn... and... she's in prison for... ALLEGEDLY refusing a c-section?

SHE'S IN PRISON????

Well, that's done it. I'm speechless. Until I can find a giant 200-billion-ton weight to drop on the whole state, YOU GO UTAH.

[forestcats.livejournal.com]

Ah UTAH!

[religioushoax.livejournal.com]

our justice system at work. it's crap like this that pisses me off. that child could have been stillborn regardless. good luck proving it was the failure to have a c-section that caused it.

[neintales.livejournal.com]

Well from what that article gives.. what someone overhears being said is indeed HEARSAY..

WTF.. I guess I could go to the police and say I overheard someone talking about how they'd kill for a cigarette and get that person arrested for attempted murder too?

THey better damn well have proof.. SOLID PROOF that this lady was told flat out "If you don't have Caesarian, one or both babies WILL die."

And then start arresting/fining or denying the ability/right to have babies to anyone whose religious practices might make caesarian's avoided too, or whoever might be scared of them...

So now there's a bunch of kids, including a NEWBORN whose mommy is in jail because she made a bad decision that *Might* have been made because she was fearful of what'd happen to.. HER OWN DAMN BODY.

Another case of "human beings are precious to everyone- until they're born and then we couldn't care less what they wanted/need"

Argh.

[feyandstrange.livejournal.com]

I've read eight different news articles looking for as much data as possible.

1) This woman has a history of mental illness and possible hospitalizations for said mental illness.
1a)Many women with mental illnesses are required to go off their meds when pregnant since the meds might hurt the kid(s).
1b)I'm not sure this woman would qualify as "sane".

2) The surviving child has been adopted/is in state care or something because or alleged child endangerment by the mother, not just because the mom is in jail; supposedly there was alcohol or drugs in the baby's system when it was born.

3) Most of the evidence against seems to be hearsay; there is one named nurse with most of the claims, and another unnamed who heard the "breast to pubic bone" comment. Supposedly there is also a signed document, signed by the defendant, claiming that she knew and understood that not having immediate surgery would likely cause harm to the babies. But there's not much data on that; also see above sanity questionability.

Other stuff left out of many of the articles:
The defendant went to several hospitals that day because she was concerned since she could no longer feel the babies moving. (So there should be better fucking records.) At one hospital she supposedly signed the aforementioned release. At another is where the "breastbone to pubic bone" comment was overheard.

No doctors actually involved with the case have been quoted that I'm aware of.

The woman claims to have had 2 prior C-cections, that she was unaware that the babies would take harm if she didn't have the surgery, and that she was concerned for her own health. (However, see above sanity claims.)

No father or husband has been mentioned in any articles, either. (In Utah. Shocking.)

I sincerely hope the defense pleads insanity as well as knicking the feet out from under the idea that a peson doesn't have the right to refuse medical treatment. Hell, if I was brought to a Kaiser hospital with organs falling out, I'd demand a second opinion; Kaiser kills people. (My oen opinion, of course.) Also, that a woman doesn't have the right to make her own damn decisions about her child. As one article mentioned, this could lead to women being accused of child endangerment for refusing doctor's advice like staying on their feet too often! (And God help you if you're a woman who got pregnant and has to keep working in a standing job and doesn't have insurance or can't afford to take any hypothetical maternity leave.)

It's enough to make me go out and get my tubes tied right freaking now. And mail my womb to Washington. Here, you want to control it? Go right the hell ahead.