posted on May 19, 2004 10:32:39 AM new
Cases Revive Childbirth Rights Debate
PHILADELPHIA May 19, 2004 — Amber Marlowe was a seasoned pro at delivering big babies her first six each weighed close to 12 pounds. So when she went into labor with her seventh last winter, she brushed off doctors who told her the 11-pound, 9-ounce girl could be delivered only by Caesarean section.
But the medical staff at Wilkes-Barre General Hospital wouldn't budge, not even with her track record. "All my others, I've done naturally," Marlowe recalled telling her physicians. "I know I can do it."
So Marlowe checked herself out and went looking for a new doctor.
While she was on her search, Wilkes-Barre General's lawyers rushed to court to get legal guardianship of her unborn child, giving the hospital the ability to force Marlowe into surgery if she returned.
The case is one of several in recent months that have revived a debate about whether mothers have an absolute right to chose when, where and how they give birth even if the health of their baby is at stake.
Marlowe ended up at another hospital, where she had a quick, natural birth she described as "a piece of cake." She didn't know about the first hospital's action until her husband was told by a reporter.
"They don't know me from anything, and they're making decisions about my body?" she said. "It was terrifying."
Officials with Wilkes-Barre General did not return calls seeking comment.
In Salt Lake City, an acknowledged cocaine addict with a history of mental health problems resisted having the operation for about two weeks before acquiescing. One of twins she was carrying died during the delay. The mother was charged with capital murder but ultimately pleaded guilty to a lesser charge of child endangerment and was sentenced to probation.
Last month, prosecutors in Pittsburgh charged an unlicensed midwife with involuntary manslaughter for failing to take a woman to the hospital when her baby began to be delivered feet-first. The child died two days later. The midwife said she had been trying to honor the mother's wishes to have the baby at home.
And in Rochester, N.Y., a judge in late March ordered a homeless woman who had lost custody of several neglected children not to get pregnant again without court approval.
Some women's advocates said the cases illustrate a newfound willingness by legal officials to interfere with women's choices about their pregnancies.
"My impression is that we have a political culture right now that falsely pits fetal rights against women's rights, and that you are seeing a kind of snowballing effect," said Lynn Paltrow, of the New York-based group National Advocates for Pregnant Women. "We're at the point now where we're talking about arresting pregnant women for making choices about their own bodies, and that's not right."
Legal experts and medical ethicists said attempts to prosecute women for pregnancy choices, or force them to undergo certain procedures for the benefit of their children, may be on shaky ground.
"There are 50 years of case law and bioethical writings that say that competent people can refuse care, and that includes pregnant women as well," said Art Caplan, chairman of medical ethics at the University of Pennsylvania.
In one influential case, a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., ruled in 1990 that a judge was wrong to have granted a hospital permission to force a pregnant cancer patient to undergo a Caesarean in an attempt to save the life of her child. The mother and baby died within two days of the operation.
Doctors' opinions on forced care for pregnant mothers have changed, too.
A 2002 survey by researchers at the University of Chicago found only 4 percent of directors of maternal-fetal medicine fellowship programs believed pregnant women should be required to undergo potentially lifesaving treatment for the sake of their fetuses, down from 47 percent in 1987.
Dr. Michael Grodin, director of Medical Ethics at the Boston University School of Medicine, said doctors should seek court intervention when a mother refuses care only if the patient is mentally ill.
"Women have a right to refuse treatment. Women have a right to control their bodies. It is a dangerous slope. What's next? If someone doesn't seek prenatal care, what are we going to do, lock them up?"
posted on May 19, 2004 11:07:24 AM new
She got it right when she said "it's terrifying." More and more doctors are getting away from c-sections which used to be fairly commonplace. This woman had every right to refuse one. Should complications have arisen during natural childbirth, they could have done an emergency c-section. It's been done many times before.
posted on May 19, 2004 11:29:59 AM new
I believe each case has to be reviewed on his own merits.
OBGYN's are leaving this field of medicine because of the large malpractice lawsuits and the extremely high cost of malpractice insurance. They're making a call that they believe is most safe to the mother and the child.
Sometimes I believe problems between patient and doctor begin when the patient hasn't had a previous relationship with the treating doctor....and both are therefore more untrusting of one another. For example - women who walk in off the street to deliver....never having received prenatal care at all.
Pregnancies are not the only times when doctors and patients disagree on what is the best path to follow in regards to their health care or method of treatment. I recently got a taste of that myself.
But I agree...there are more people who are beginning to take the side of protectionism for the unborn child....and the results of that are becoming more noticable.
posted on May 19, 2004 12:14:38 PM new
Thank you for your concern, KD, it's appreciated. And yes, it was serious but each day I wake up and I'm breathing....is a GREAT day.
I'm better but I am more wound up, agitated and short tempered than normal - You noticed that did ya? LOL - I apologize....I'll work to improve that.
-----------------------
I didn't mean to take the thread off topic....but did want to point out that patients and doctors do have disagreements at other times....not just when it's pregnancy related.
posted on May 19, 2004 12:35:09 PM new
Cripes Linda, I knew something was up. I also know that you don't like to talk about yourself or your "baggage", so I won't pry. Beyond the discussions, I care for you and so do many here. I hope you still know that.
Yes, when we mainly discuss political/religious/etc issues....we do only tend to see one side of the person.
-------------------
I said I'll work on it helen.....now share your excuse for why your that way.
posted on May 19, 2004 01:27:10 PM new
I'll just never put up with your crap, linda...never.
Edited to add that I am generally in a good mood. . My responses to you are generally not reflective of my mood but in reaction to your negative comments to me. Lately, I haven't been posting much or starting threads because I've been busy with other projects. For the benefit of others here, I sincerely hope that you have resolved your problem.
Helen
[ edited by Helenjw on May 19, 2004 02:33 PM ]
