Woman forced to have C section

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would bet that had she delivered vaginally and there was a bad outcome, she would have sued the hospital.

Probably but hospital can't force C-section to avoid lawsuit, it has to be medically warranted and patient should've a choice to sign a waiver and do as they please, if its covered by their insurance.

May be this woman was worried about high hospital bill tied to a C-section?

It said she had to care for family, including her mother, which complicates the matter significantly. The fact of the matter is that women are caregivers and society doesn't understand this. I do think people should have the agency to make dumb decisions, but society is going about this all wrong. If you're a single mother with kids and elderly parents at home, there often aren't a lot, if any, available, affordable resources. Even if not single, presumably her DH is away at work all day. People are one decision away from ruin.

I mean she’s a single mom having her FOURTH child. Maybe she might have given some consideration to her responsibilities before getting knocked up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would bet that had she delivered vaginally and there was a bad outcome, she would have sued the hospital.

Probably but hospital can't force C-section to avoid lawsuit, it has to be medically warranted and patient should've a choice to sign a waiver and do as they please, if its covered by their insurance.

May be this woman was worried about high hospital bill tied to a C-section?

It isn’t fear of a lawsuit; it’s fear of death for the patient. They have risk measurements. Obesity, 2/3 prior sections, and a labor not progressing are not good indicators.

So what? People are allowed to refuse lifesaving medical care in every other context. We don't strap people down and pump unwanted chemotherapy into their bodies. Why should this be any different?

Because at 36+ weeks there's another actual life on the other side of the abdominal and uterine wall, and even under Roe, the state was allowed to assert its interest at that point in time.

+1 I’m about the most pro-choice person possible and I have no patience for people who are so enamored by how exactly they would like their birth to go that they endanger not only their own life and health but also that of their newborn. The problem now is that states are affirming those rights for embryos and fetuses way before viability.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:3 previous C sections, morbidly obese - lots of risk factors here. I’m very pro choice even though I really dislike abortion simply because I think an unwanted child is a tragedy, however, I’m mulling over this whole thing since we’re talking about full term babies who will possibly suffer lifelong consequences from a poor decision, but I still have concerns about female autonomy.

+1 But will it stop at the morbidly obese woman who may have required a c-section after all? What if you are thin, went through pre-birth classes, exercise and eat well, have a seasoned doula, and feel confident that you can get through a rough labor (I'm sure there are more than a handful of us on this site who fit this description)? For women in Florida and similar conservative states, are all bets off now? Can the hospital bring in the state because you're in labor a little too long for their taste and they know of a great judge who has a few minutes to yell at you from an iPad?

You're not going to like this answer, but the two women whose personal accounts were relayed in the article clearly didn't have an OBGYN that supported their decision and that was present at the labor.

The on call doctors didn't want the liability.

I think if the mom can't have it both ways - she can't use the resources of the hospital and completely ignore their advice. If she wanted freedom she should have delivered at home.

Yeah, why is she using a free government financed hospita--, oh, in Florida patients pay for their own hospital care?

Imagine if you walked into Walmart and they called the court to force you to eat a pepperoni pizza.

I'm not sure what your point is. Just because I pay somebody doesn't mean they have to do whatever I want, and that includes doctors.

I just realized what the OPs article reminded me of. It was a situation in Alexandria where the mom was so desperate to avoid a c section she tried to deliver a breach baby at home, which died. In the articles at the time, they said other midwives had turned down the job because it was too risky. I don't see why doctors shouldn't also be able to turn down a risky method of birth.

https://abcnews.com/Health/midwife-karen-carr-pleads-guilty-felonies-babys-death/story?id=13583237

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:3 previous C sections, morbidly obese - lots of risk factors here. I’m very pro choice even though I really dislike abortion simply because I think an unwanted child is a tragedy, however, I’m mulling over this whole thing since we’re talking about full term babies who will possibly suffer lifelong consequences from a poor decision, but I still have concerns about female autonomy.

+1 But will it stop at the morbidly obese woman who may have required a c-section after all? What if you are thin, went through pre-birth classes, exercise and eat well, have a seasoned doula, and feel confident that you can get through a rough labor (I'm sure there are more than a handful of us on this site who fit this description)? For women in Florida and similar conservative states, are all bets off now? Can the hospital bring in the state because you're in labor a little too long for their taste and they know of a great judge who has a few minutes to yell at you from an iPad?

You're not going to like this answer, but the two women whose personal accounts were relayed in the article clearly didn't have an OBGYN that supported their decision and that was present at the labor.

The on call doctors didn't want the liability.

I think if the mom can't have it both ways - she can't use the resources of the hospital and completely ignore their advice. If she wanted freedom she should have delivered at home.

Yeah, why is she using a free government financed hospita--, oh, in Florida patients pay for their own hospital care?

Imagine if you walked into Walmart and they called the court to force you to eat a pepperoni pizza.

I'm not sure what your point is. Just because I pay somebody doesn't mean they have to do whatever I want, and that includes doctors.

I just realized what the OPs article reminded me of. It was a situation in Alexandria where the mom was so desperate to avoid a c section she tried to deliver a breach baby at home, which died. In the articles at the time, they said other midwives had turned down the job because it was too risky. I don't see why doctors shouldn't also be able to turn down a risky method of birth.

https://abcnews.com/Health/midwife-karen-carr-pleads-guilty-felonies-babys-death/story?id=13583237

OMG the thread here on that case was epic - I think it was deleted. Then she continued practicing illegally and got in trouble again.
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/159798.page

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, in the state of Florida, you can reject the life-saving measles vaccine for your child but if you're a woman, you have no autonomy to reject a C-section, and the hospital and state will fill up your room with people insisting you do what the judge tells you to do even if you know your own body and that you are able to give birth vaginally. All of a sudden, medical freedom doesn't exist in the state of Florida.

In Florida's defense, she is black.

Conservative state governments are using minorities as test subjects for their agenda. Go after migrants and those who “look” like migrants. See what kind of control and abuse the rest of the population will tolerate. Same here with women’s healthcare. These women and others are test subjects for the greater Christian nationalist plan. See what the Project 2025 loons can get away with before they feel comfortable enough to start bringing down the iron first on the rest of us, insisting it’s a good iron first because it stamps the comforting image of a cross on everything as it crushes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would bet that had she delivered vaginally and there was a bad outcome, she would have sued the hospital.

You mean her family. If there are complications with vbac, all end in death of the mother. Few obgyns like doing vbac.

The problem is the mothers these days try to direct their birth. It’s very annoying. Just get the baby out safely and get the hell out

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would bet that had she delivered vaginally and there was a bad outcome, she would have sued the hospital.

You mean her family. If there are complications with vbac, all end in death of the mother. Few obgyns like doing vbac.

The problem is the mothers these days try to direct their birth. It’s very annoying. Just get the baby out safely and get the hell out

But they need an “experince”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would bet that had she delivered vaginally and there was a bad outcome, she would have sued the hospital.

You mean her family. If there are complications with vbac, all end in death of the mother. Few obgyns like doing vbac.

The problem is the mothers these days try to direct their birth. It’s very annoying. Just get the baby out safely and get the hell out

But they need an “experince”.

What experience? This ain’t wedding planning. Childbirth isn’t supposed to be empowering, planned to the minute, or rehearsed by any means. It’s very run and gun and spontaneous. If the doctors recommended a C section, it’s for very good reason. They always recommend a C section for those who already had it before because it’s easier and the risk of uterine rupture (where a past c section scar opens up and tears) is too high in vaginal births after C section. The doctors know what they are doing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would bet that had she delivered vaginally and there was a bad outcome, she would have sued the hospital.

You mean her family. If there are complications with vbac, all end in death of the mother. Few obgyns like doing vbac.

The problem is the mothers these days try to direct their birth. It’s very annoying. Just get the baby out safely and get the hell out

But they need an “experince”.

What experience? This ain’t wedding planning. Childbirth isn’t supposed to be empowering, planned to the minute, or rehearsed by any means. It’s very run and gun and spontaneous. If the doctors recommended a C section, it’s for very good reason. They always recommend a C section for those who already had it before because it’s easier and the risk of uterine rupture (where a past c section scar opens up and tears) is too high in vaginal births after C section. The doctors know what they are doing.

It’s a little more complicated than that, but in this case I think the doctors had good reason. In the old days they just sedated women for childbirth because it was easier. Do you think women should just shut up and go along with anything?

[Anonymous]

Doula my nuts

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is nothing wrong with a C-section.

There is. Do your research, troll.

DP. There are things that can go wrong with a c-section, but it is still medically safer than delivering vaginally once you get to 39 weeks gestation, even if we're not talking about a VBAC.

Not safer long-term for the mother and not safer for future pregnancies. But if you’re a pro lifer who thinks the mother is just an incubator, then sure “safer”.

No, I'm a doctor and not a pro-lifer, and I do not think the mother is an incubator.

It's just a matter of short and long term risk analysis. Vaginal deliveries are great. I have no problem if a pregnant woman wants to deliver vaginally, absent significant risk factors. I also don't think that offering induction at 39 weeks gestation is bad medicine, and I don't think women who elect to have a c-section (and those who provide them) are bad people.

We can talk about all of this without making unfounded judgments. Professional protocols are there for a reason.

But this woman didn’t elect to have a c-section. She was forced. Treating women like incubators — items without bodily autonomy who exist only to benefit a baby— is bad.

And? Doctors and hospitals make more money from a c-section. So these aren’t disinterested people making calls SOLELY in the interest of any patient.