Pregnant Women Warned: Consent to Surgical Birth or Else

[Atreus21]

This is relevant:

The Florida Supreme Court has held that physicians aren't liable when they respect the decision of a competent and informed patient to delay or refuse a procedure. Bayfront Health could have simply made Goodall sign liability waiver paperwork, points out Farah Diaz-Tello, a staff attorney with NAPW. Instead, "what probably happened is ... the hospital calculated their risk and thought that the better course of action would be to scare her away from coming in so that she would quit the practice."

If this is true, the hospital either has little trust in it, or is being nasty.

Kind of a moot point anyway. The woman gave birth via c-section after attempting a vaginal birth. After labor failed to progress, she consented to the surgery.

 

[theeedude]

Did yall read the article? Did yall even read the opening post?

This is much more than a hospital saying if you come here you will have to have a c-section.

The hospital intends to get a court order and force the woman to have a c-section against her will.

Explain to me how being held down, drugged, and forced to have a medical procedure against your will in even remotely related to consent

Against her will not found. If she goes to that hospital to give birth, it's their responsibility to deliver that baby safely, and thus their decision on what the safe way to deliver that baby is. If she doesn't like it, she can go to another hospital or give birth at home.
It's like taking a flight, once you get on, the captain has a responsibility for your safety, so you may want to leave the plane mid-flight, but nope, you have to stay on for the duration, like a prisoner. Is he keeping you there against your will? In the immediate moment you decide you want to leave, yes, but you consented to it when you got on the plane.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Did yall read the article? Did yall even read the opening post?

This is much more than a hospital saying if you come here you will have to have a c-section.

The hospital intends to get a court order and force the woman to have a c-section against her will.

Explain to me how being held down, drugged, and forced to have a medical procedure against your will in even remotely related to consent

A letter from Bayfront's chief financial officer said if she attempted a "trial of labor," the facility would report her to the state's Department of Children and Family Services, seek a court order to perform the surgery, and do the procedure "with or without (her) consent" if she stepped foot in the hospital.

They aren't stopping her from seeking other options. They're telling her the treatment she will get if she comes to that hospital.

 

[theeedude]

This is relevant:



If this is true, the hospital either has little trust in it, or is being nasty.

Kind of a moot point anyway. The woman gave birth via c-section after attempting a vaginal birth. After labor failed to progress, she consented to the surgery.

I am not even sure she can sign away liability for the baby. Even for herself, she can later say she was under duress and weasel out of it.

 

[dank69]

Did yall read the article? Did yall even read the opening post?

This is much more than a hospital saying if you come here you will have to have a c-section.

The hospital intends to get a court order and force the woman to have a c-section against her will.

Explain to me how being held down, drugged, and forced to have a medical procedure against your will in even remotely related to consent

I thought you would be concerned for the life of the baby over that of the mother. Isn't that your rationale for opposing abortion? Are you able to see how retarded you are?

 

[Atreus21]

I am not even sure she can sign away liability for the baby. Even for herself, she can later say she was under duress and weasel out of it.

Right. Hospital doesn't trust it. Can't say I blame them.

 

[Texashiker]

It's like taking a flight, once you get on, the captain has a responsibility for your safety, so you may want to leave the plane mid-flight, but nope, you have to stay on for the duration, like a prisoner. Is he keeping you there against your will? In the immediate moment you decide you want to leave, yes, but you consented to it when you got on the plane.

There have been court decisions that hospitals and doctors are not liable for the bad decisions of their patients.

The mother could have signed a consent form and relieved the doctor and hospital of all liability.

Read the article.

 

[theeedude]

There have been court decisions that hospitals and doctors are not liable for the bad decisions of their patients.

The mother could have signed a consent form and relieved the doctor and hospital of all liability.

Read the article.

You can sign anything. It then has to stand up in court. Juries are sympathetic to women with deformed or dead infants. They want to make everything all right with someone else's money.

 

[nehalem256]

You can sign anything. It then has to stand up in court. Juries are sympathetic to women with deformed or dead infants. They want to make everything all right with someone else's money.

So you are saying the issue is that women aren't held accountable for their choices :biggrin:

 

[Jaskalas]

Is the hospital snatching her off the street and forcing her to have a c-section there?
Is the hospital tricking her, sure, come in and have vaginal birth, and then forcing her to have a c-section?
No, the hospital is telling her up front, IF you come here, delivering the baby safely becomes our responsibility, and you are going to get a c-section. So if you don't want a c-section, don't come here to give birth. That particular hospital believes that it cannot deliver the baby safely vaginally. She is free to find a hospital that believes otherwise. She is not free to force a hospital to deliver a baby in a way the hospital considers unsafe.

Given the dangers a c-section causes with vaginal birth, I understand the hospital's policy of only continuing to do c-sections.

 

[Theb]

Scary times to be an OB, even the libertarians think they should be able to force you to perform procedures that you think are too risky.

 

[TheVrolok]

TH fail threads are my favorite fail threads.

 

[nehalem256]

Scary times to be an OB, even the libertarians think they should be able to force you to perform procedures that you think are too risky.

I would think that a vaginal birth is a "procedure" in the same way that taking a crap is.

Now hopefully some hospital VP doesn't read this and think it makes since to start billing $500 for taking a crap in a hospital toilet

 

[nehalem256]

Scary times to be an OB, even the libertarians think they should be able to force you to perform procedures that you think are too risky.

You have any evidence for this statement?

For example from the article:

An analysis of 203 previous papers on VBAC found mixed outcomes. Overall rates of harm were low for both VBAC and repeat elective c-sections. The newborn mortality rate was 1.3 per 1,000 births with VBAC, compared to 0.5 for repeat c-section. Maternal mortality was 13.4 percent per 100,000 births for repeat c-section, compared to 3.8 percent for vaginal delivery. The authors concluded that "VBAC is a reasonable and safe choice for the majority of women with prior cesarean." They also noted mounting evidence that the more c-sections a woman has, the riskier the surgery becomes.

 

[surfsatwerk]

I would think that a vaginal birth is a "procedure" in the same way that taking a crap is.

 

[Capt Caveman]

Posting in another TH ignorant troll thread.

 

[brycejones]

I would think that a vaginal birth is a "procedure" in the same way that taking a crap is.

Yet another moronic comment about women's health from a troll whose only knowledge about women comes from the internet.

Don't worry your toaster can still give natural birth.

 

[alzan]

I would think that a vaginal birth is a "procedure" in the same way that taking a crap is.

So you came out of your mother's anus.

That explains a lot.

 

[Texashiker]

Given the dangers a c-section causes with vaginal birth, I understand the hospital's policy of only continuing to do c-sections.

It is not "just" hospital policy. A judge refused to side with the woman.

In effect, the judge said the woman does not have the right to make medical decisions for herself.

 

[Texashiker]

Posting in another TH ignorant troll thread.

Did you take the time to read the article?

A judge refused to issue an order protecting the woman from an unwanted medical procedure.

 

[MrPickins]

So you came out of your mother's anus.

That explains a lot.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Toilet+Baby

 

[MrPickins]

Did you take the time to read the article?

A judge refused to issue an order protecting the woman from an unwanted medical procedure.

She can "protect" herself by choosing a different health care provider.

 

[nehalem256]

Don't worry your toaster can still give natural birth.

If a toaster pops up toast in a hospital is that a medical procedure?

So you came out of your mother's anus.

That explains a lot.

Not sure how you came up with that. Vaginal birth is a normal bodily process where a baby is expelled from a woman's uterus through her vagina.

Now it is possible that medical procedures could be require in conjunction with process, but the actual vaginal birth itself is not a procedure.

What is with liberals trying to turn normal bodily functions into "procedures" or "medical conditions"?

 

[SlowSpyder]

Did you take the time to read the article?

A judge refused to issue an order protecting the woman from an unwanted medical procedure.

The judge agreed with the hospital that they have the right to only perform treatment that they feel is in the best interest of the patient(s). The judge agreed that the hospital doesn't need to be put at fianancial risk for performing a procedure that goes against medical guidelines. For the millionth time, she isn't being forced to have an unwanted procedure. She is still free to seek other options, she had at least nine months to do so.

If a toaster pops up toast in a hospital is that a medical procedure?




Not sure how you came up with that. Vaginal birth is a normal bodily process where a baby is expelled from a woman's uterus through her vagina.

Now it is possible that medical procedures could be require in conjunction with process, but the actual vaginal birth itself is not a procedure.

What is with liberals trying to turn normal bodily functions into "procedures" or "medical conditions"?

Do most people go to the hospital when they take a shit? Maybe 2000 years ago birth wasn't a medical procedure. Today it is, most people in this country go to a hospital or have some kind of medical professional involved in the pregnancy and delivery.

 

[alzan]

If a toaster pops up toast in a hospital is that a medical procedure?




Not sure how you came up with that. Vaginal birth is a normal bodily process where a baby is expelled from a woman's uterus through her vagina.

Now it is possible that medical procedures could be require in conjunction with process, but the actual vaginal birth itself is not a procedure.

What is with liberals trying to turn normal bodily functions into "procedures" or "medical conditions"?

Just using your "logic".

Hopefully that shows you the level of ignorance your posts reach.

Interestingly enough, the contents of the rectum expel during a vaginal birth about 80% of the time.