Midwife charged in DC? Karen Carr, CPM...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That said, if a doctor had been similarly negligent, he would have been sued for everything he had, but not threatened with jail/felonies.

KC had every opportunity to get licensed in VA and chose not to. That's on her. She likely would have avoided this whole fiasco if she's been licensed - then similiar to another licensed provider she would have been deemed negligent and maybe had her license revoked, etc., but NOT charged with involuntary manslaughter. Now, as it stands, she risks going to jail if she chooses to practice anywhere in the DC/MD/VA region before her 8 year probationary period is up. She maybe would have lost the ability to practice in VA, but she would have done herself a service by getting licensed in the ONE state that does allow CPMs. Bad call, KC, bad call.

How would being licensed have protected her from being charged with manslaughter?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It could have gone from frank to complete.

Or kneeling or a stargazer, which would be more dramatic increases in risk than frank to complete. Footling, kneeling, stargazing, any of the above would be a massive increase in risk.

I posted way above that Tchabo risked me out for a trial of breech delivery when my baby shifted position. He may well have said he would give her a trial of labor if he was in town if the baby was in a better position when she saw him. Of course, in the hospital they would have been monitoring with ultrasound and it would have been c-section when the position was no longer optimum. That consult may have given the mom more assurance to try vaginal delivery though.

I was wondering if perhaps Karen may have been reluctant to transfer trying to make the mom happy with not going to the hospital? Or that the parents resisted a 911 call? Without being there there is not way to know. Of course Karen could have been using the assistants to help her with the mom's position and trying to get the baby out. Maybe the dad was also trying to not have the baby go to the hospital based on the mom's strong feelings? If that is the mom who posted though it sure doesn't sound like that is how it went down. Anyone have any knowledge re: Karen's willingness or reluctance to transfer when practicing in a state where she isn't licensed?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I have no problem with a mother attempting a vaginal breech delivery so long as it's in a freaking hospital where her baby's life can be saved if his head gets stuck or the cord compresses. That is the issue here. The mother wasn't negligent for attempting a vaginal breech delivery. She was negligent for doing so in her house!

Vaginal breech is not an option in DC/MD/VA. Tchabo is the only one, and he is retiring. This is the issue. This is utterly disgusting and it is a shame. Let's get mad at the OB/GYNs who won't/can't learn the skills to manage vaginal breech. This mother had no choice when it came to vaginal/c-section in the hospital.
It's no longer possible to reverse the decline in vaginal breech. What makes it safe is an experienced provider, and even if it weren't for medical malpractice, there are not enough women demanding breech deliveries to give more than a handful of providers sufficient experience to be good at it. It's a vicious cycle that can't be broken. Who wants to be the guinea pig? It's not like they just don't tell you how in medical school. I know an OB who delivers breech and when she has one, all the residents come to watch. I still wouldn't let one of them near me for a breech delivery.

I had my first in the UK. Some providers there still do breech willingly, and they can't force you to have a C. If you say no, they can't do anything--you show up and deliver just like anyone else. But very few planned breech births are performed. Mine was still breech at 36 weeks and I decided it was going to be ECV or a C, because the idea of winding up with a breech and no one but a younger midwife and a resident terrified me. (I wound up with a C for an entirely different reason.) De-skilling is not just a US problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That said, if a doctor had been similarly negligent, he would have been sued for everything he had, but not threatened with jail/felonies.

KC had every opportunity to get licensed in VA and chose not to. That's on her. She likely would have avoided this whole fiasco if she's been licensed - then similiar to another licensed provider she would have been deemed negligent and maybe had her license revoked, etc., but NOT charged with involuntary manslaughter. Now, as it stands, she risks going to jail if she chooses to practice anywhere in the DC/MD/VA region before her 8 year probationary period is up. She maybe would have lost the ability to practice in VA, but she would have done herself a service by getting licensed in the ONE state that does allow CPMs. Bad call, KC, bad call.

How would being licensed have protected her from being charged with manslaughter?

If she had been licensed, she would not have been doing anything illegal. There is no law against delivering a breech baby at home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That said, if a doctor had been similarly negligent, he would have been sued for everything he had, but not threatened with jail/felonies.

KC had every opportunity to get licensed in VA and chose not to. That's on her. She likely would have avoided this whole fiasco if she's been licensed - then similiar to another licensed provider she would have been deemed negligent and maybe had her license revoked, etc., but NOT charged with involuntary manslaughter. Now, as it stands, she risks going to jail if she chooses to practice anywhere in the DC/MD/VA region before her 8 year probationary period is up. She maybe would have lost the ability to practice in VA, but she would have done herself a service by getting licensed in the ONE state that does allow CPMs. Bad call, KC, bad call.

How would being licensed have protected her from being charged with manslaughter?

If she had been licensed, she would not have been doing anything illegal. There is no law against delivering a breech baby at home.

But if that was the case, she would only have been charged with practicing without a license -- indeed, one of the charges to which she pleaded guilty was performing an invasive procedure without a license. But she was also charged with child endangerment and involuntary manslaughter -- how would having a license protected her from those charges?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That said, if a doctor had been similarly negligent, he would have been sued for everything he had, but not threatened with jail/felonies.

KC had every opportunity to get licensed in VA and chose not to. That's on her. She likely would have avoided this whole fiasco if she's been licensed - then similiar to another licensed provider she would have been deemed negligent and maybe had her license revoked, etc., but NOT charged with involuntary manslaughter. Now, as it stands, she risks going to jail if she chooses to practice anywhere in the DC/MD/VA region before her 8 year probationary period is up. She maybe would have lost the ability to practice in VA, but she would have done herself a service by getting licensed in the ONE state that does allow CPMs. Bad call, KC, bad call.

How would being licensed have protected her from being charged with manslaughter?

If she had been licensed, she would not have been doing anything illegal. There is no law against delivering a breech baby at home.

But if that was the case, she would only have been charged with practicing without a license -- indeed, one of the charges to which she pleaded guilty was performing an invasive procedure without a license. But she was also charged with child endangerment and involuntary manslaughter -- how would having a license protected her from those charges?

If you kill someone, even without intending to, while commiting an unlawful act, it's involuntary manslaughter.

[Anonymous]

We are free to terminate a pregnancy. Should we opt to carry a pregnancy to term we have obligations to provide reasonable care for our children. Denying your child life saving medical intervention is, for example, illegal. I think choosing a home birth under the circumstances that existed in this case is akin to denying life saving care to your child.

Not necessarily true. A person cannot be forced to undergo any medical procedure for the benefit of another person, even if such procedure would be a life saving intervention for one's own child. For example, if a child needs an organ transplant, and the parent is the only matching donor, the parent still cannot be forced to donate. Yet the parent refusing to donate would be "denying your child life saving medical intervention."

Likewise, you also cannot be forced to deliver your baby by a method to which you do not consent, even if such delivery method is required to save your child's life.

(And for that matter, most states have statutes that allow parents to use their religious beliefs as a defense against prosecution for withholding medical treatment from their children.)

[Anonymous]

Well, 96 pages of reasing and this is what I've concluded from this case:

1. The docs and midwives who suggested the c section had a point, but that's somewhat hindsight if originally the breech position was favorable.

2. When shopping for a midwife, no matter the certications and quoted experience, they can mislead you and not even do what their training says they should, such as identifying the need for backup or calling for it.

3. Many believe no emt intervention would have been better than what carr was doing or saved the baby.

4. Hospital advocates believe # 3 proves she should have been in the hospital in the first place, while home birth advocates say hospital process would have brought on another set of equally dangerous risks.

5. Many equate hospital births with medicated births.

6. Home birthers believe a low risk birth at home is different but equal in risk and therefore, ok, and that standard care is corrupt by the medical field, while hospital advocates feel that home births are stepping back in time and unnecessarily risky.

7. Many feel standard regulation of midwifery and a far more rigorous training would help whereas others feel it would turn it into the same corrupt wing they consider the med world to be, though many do reference countries where this is the case in defense of their stance.

What I can conclude here is that the same current energy spent on preparing for either camp of brith can be spent on merging the 2. You CAN have an unmedicated birth in a hosptial, accompanied by a midwife who can both support and speak for you if and when the staff gives you a hard time (remember that hospotals require your signature for anything, so just withold it), and you can then have the immediate care you or your child might need for unforeseen complications. That's my take having read every single post fro all sides. I hope that mothers to be weigh everything as prudently.

As for the legal side of it, carr wasn't licenced and therefore faces legal issues as an ordinary participant in something she was legally not permitted or legally considered cimpetent to handle, so she is not protect by malpractice of any profession (but manslaughter) as a doc would have been.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That said, if a doctor had been similarly negligent, he would have been sued for everything he had, but not threatened with jail/felonies.

KC had every opportunity to get licensed in VA and chose not to. That's on her. She likely would have avoided this whole fiasco if she's been licensed - then similiar to another licensed provider she would have been deemed negligent and maybe had her license revoked, etc., but NOT charged with involuntary manslaughter. Now, as it stands, she risks going to jail if she chooses to practice anywhere in the DC/MD/VA region before her 8 year probationary period is up. She maybe would have lost the ability to practice in VA, but she would have done herself a service by getting licensed in the ONE state that does allow CPMs. Bad call, KC, bad call.

How would being licensed have protected her from being charged with manslaughter?

If she had been licensed, she would not have been doing anything illegal. There is no law against delivering a breech baby at home.

But if that was the case, she would only have been charged with practicing without a license -- indeed, one of the charges to which she pleaded guilty was performing an invasive procedure without a license. But she was also charged with child endangerment and involuntary manslaughter -- how would having a license protected her from those charges?

If she were a licensed professional, she could have been brought up on charges of malpractice. Waiting 33 minutes to call for backup? Definitely could have proceeded to trial.

[Anonymous]

When Mother's Day Hurts
http://www.goodtherapy.org/blog/mothers-day-grief/

[Anonymous]

Eric was a beautiful baby. JP and Tom, i'm sorry for the loss of a full life with your baby.

Although the hurtful things that have been said about you cannot even come close to the hurt you feel at what happened, I hope that you are able to forgive those that were unkind and forgive yourself.

I hope that nobody has to endure the anonymous public judgement that the players in this event have had to endure. And, that if you are ever find yourself in this place, you will remember your conduct on this forum. Karmic payback can be equally as unkind/kind.

Nobody serves women in order to harm them and no mother willingly puts her child in harms way. Intention matters. I know, I know it happens, but mostly not, and certainly not in this case.

The discussions here have been very very important.

The blame game has been sickening.

Let's work on fixing the system.

[Anonymous]

Can someone summarize what happened with the trial last week including a summary of the statement of facts and what happened with each charge?

[Anonymous]

Back a few pages, there is a description of the mom as being knowledgeable about the risks associated with this. But then on that Birth Care review, the mom seems to be blaming everyone and saying that no one told her the risks. So which is it? Is that for sure her review?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Back a few pages, there is a description of the mom as being knowledgeable about the risks associated with this. But then on that Birth Care review, the mom seems to be blaming everyone and saying that no one told her the risks. So which is it? Is that for sure her review?

That original review/post was taken down on City Search, presumably at the request of the author.

[Anonymous]

Who's presuming that? Not me. I presume that BirthCare had it removed.