Pregnant Women Warned: Consent to Surgical Birth or Else

[theeedude]

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

That's a beauty of Republicans trying to make a reach around argument about women's health. They always end up saying something completely retarded that alienates every woman that hears it.

 

[Texashiker]

IF SHE HAS HER DELIVERY AT THEIR HOSPITAL.

Do you have reading issues?

Please address the hospital seeking a court order that would force the woman to have a medical procedure against her will.

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

Just about everyone is ignoring that the hospital is telling the woman to submit to a c-section, or the hospital will get a court order and do the c-section against her will.

Are you missing the fact that she needs to go to that hospital for that to happen?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

IF SHE HAS HER DELIVERY AT THEIR HOSPITAL.

Do you have reading/comprehension issues?

I still want to know what gun he's going to use to shoot the person who asks him to do so.

 

[SlowSpyder]

There is a difference in telling and forcing by court order.

Why are you ignoring the court order point of the article?

Post 28.

 

[Texashiker]

Are you missing the fact that she needs to go to that hospital for that to happen?

No, I am not missing anything.

The woman is trying to make a decision for her body. The hospital and the judge says she does not have such a right.

When do people not have a right to make decisions for their bodies?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

No, I am not missing anything.

The woman is trying to make a decision for her body. The hospital and the judge says she does not have such a right.

When do people not have a right to make decisions for their bodies?

Which gun are you going to use?

 

[MrPickins]

Please address the hospital seeking a court order that would force the woman to have a medical procedure against her will.

At this point, I'm convinced you're being intentionally obtuse.

The court order is only to protect the hospital from liability for following through on their word to treat the patient in the safest way possible.

If she has her delivery at a different hospital, no court order will be enforced.

On the other hand, it's hard to conceive how someone who staunchly against abortion at any point after conception could side with the woman on this.

TH is widely known on these forums to be a hypocrite.

When do people not have a right to make decisions for their bodies?

According to you, when it puts a fetus at risk.

 

[Texashiker]

At this point, I'm convinced you're being intentionally obtuse.

The court order is only to protect the hospital from liability for following through on their word to treat the patient in the safest way possible.

Did you read the part in the article where the hospital nor doctor can be held responsible for the bad decisions of the patient?

Sign a waver and be done with it.

If the woman wanted to have a vaginal birth, that should be her right.

 

[Pulsar]

I really do scratch my head at some of your posts. The article links to the main blog article, and it doesn't explain why she had 3 previous C sections. Generally when a C section is preferred it has to do with very real potential complications that can occur in Vaginal delivery that post a major risk to the baby and the mothers life.

In addition with each C section comes a very real risk of uterine rupture if a woman tries to do a normal vaginal birth.

Now having said all that, women can choose not to have their baby in a hospital setting. Many women do home birthing. Some women use a midwife who is trained in home birthing.

The article seems to be leaving a lot of information out. I guess you are tying to make some weird point that because they are forcing her to have a C section that somehow this relates to abortion? Not sure what your getting at.

Dude. No. Just no. Go on spewing your crap about cops, but stay out of trying to talk about medical issues.

C-Sections are performed for a number of reasons - but increasingly they are performed because they can be scheduled and are far faster and easier for the hospital involved (plus they get a whole lot more money for the procedure). It's an epidemic in the US.

In addition, VBAC's are common, perfectly safe in most cases.... just don't. Ok?

 

[theeedude]

No, I am not missing anything.

The woman is trying to make a decision for her body. The hospital and the judge says she does not have such a right.

When do people not have a right to make decisions for their bodies?

She has a right to not bring her body to the hospital. I am sure the hospital would appreciate that very much.
If she does bring it in, the hospital is going to argue its side in court, she is free to argue her side, and the judge will decide based on the law in her jurisdiction.
It's a simple concept. If you are voluntarily putting responsibility for your and your baby's health in the hands of a hospital and doctors, you don't then get to play doctor and tell them how to do their jobs.

 

[theeedude]

Did you read the part in the article where the hospital nor doctor can be held responsible for the bad decisions of the patient?

Sign a waver and be done with it.

If the woman wanted to have a vaginal birth, that should be her right.

What if it's a breach baby that can't be delivered vaginally? Is it her right to do it anyway, in a hospital where the hospital is responsible for her and her baby?

 

[MrPickins]

In addition, VBAC's are common, perfectly safe in most cases.... just don't. Ok?

3 cesareans/0 vaginal births seems to be an exceptional case.

I'm not a Dr, but from what I understand the risk increases with each scar.

 

[Texashiker]

She has a right to not bring her body to the hospital. I am sure the hospital would appreciate that very much.

That is discrimination.

the hospital is going to argue its side in court, she is free to argue her side, and the judge will decide based on the law in her jurisdiction.

You did not read the article.

The lady tried to get a restraining order against the hospital. The judge refused her request.

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

 

[SlowSpyder]

Dude. No. Just no. Go on spewing your crap about cops, but stay out of trying to talk about medical issues.

C-Sections are performed for a number of reasons - but increasingly they are performed because they can be scheduled and are far faster and easier for the hospital involved (plus they get a whole lot more money for the procedure). It's an epidemic in the US.

In addition, VBAC's are common, perfectly safe in most cases.... just don't. Ok?

My exwife and I have one child. They made it clear that she would not likely ever deliver vaginally after the c-section, some doctors will do it, but not many. Even if it is now considered safe by a larger margin than before, it is still largely a decision made for the hospital's insurance. If they won't cover the procedure in the event of something going horribly wrong, the doctors / hospital won't do it.

 

[MrPickins]

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

Are you defending her right to put her unborn child at risk?

You must also be pro-slavery. :whiste:

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

That is discrimination.




You did not read the article.

The lady tried to get a restraining order against the hospital. The judge refused her request.

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

And again a judge would say a person does not have the right to force you to shoot someone who wishes it. Well that person, according to you that is, has the right to force someone to comply so they can do as they please with their body.

You are asked to kill them. What gun will you use?

 

[theeedude]

That is discrimination.




You did not read the article.

The lady tried to get a restraining order against the hospital. The judge refused her request.

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

Then that's the law in her state of Florida, so you should take it up with the people in charge and stop railing on the hospital.

State House - Republican
State Senate - Republican
Governor - Republican

time to clean house

 

[Texashiker]

Are you defending her right to put her unborn child at risk?

You must also be pro-slavery. :whiste:

I am defending a womans (and mans) right to make medical decisions for their body.

If a woman can be forced to have a c-section against her will, what about cancer treatments, being overweight, being depressed,,,, or anything else?

You go to a doctor for a long time for whatever. Then one day you are told if you go back you will be restrained against your will, medicated and have a medical procedure against your will.

We went through this with forced sterilizations in the 20th century. Seems not much has changed.

Early 1900s, sorry kid, you are going to be sterilized because it is in the best interest of society.

2014, sorry lady, you have to have a c-section because it is in your best interest.

Whats next?

2024, line the fat people up for gastric bypass surgery? Refuse and we get a court order.

And again a judge would say a person does not have the right to force you to shoot someone who wishes it. Well that person, according to you that is, has the right to force someone to comply so they can do as they please with their body.

You are asked to kill them. What gun will you use?

What the hell are you even talking about?

Somehow vaginal birth is the same as shooting someone?

 

[theeedude]

What if it's a breach baby, with no c-section, both mother and baby die. Should she have a right to show up a t a hospital and say, be responsible for my and my baby's health, but don't you dare do a c-section on me?

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Yet another THWTFBBQ thread

 

[theeedude]

Yet another THWTFBBQ thread

TH,JD,MD,OBGYN thread more like it

 

[Texashiker]

What if it's a breach baby, with no c-section, both mother and baby die. Should she have a right to show up a t a hospital and say, be responsible for my and my baby's health, but don't you dare do a c-section on me?

I think the woman wanted to try a vaginal birth.

c-sections are at epidemic numbers. No other nation in the world has a higher rate of c-sections than the USA. This is also while we have some of the highest infant motility rates out of all developed nations.

In short, in the USA we have more c-sections and more babies die than in other developed nations.

We talk about womens rights, yet hospitals, doctors and judges trample womens rights, and people justify it?

 

[Capt Caveman]

Did you take the time to read the article?

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

If you're not trolling, you obviously don't have the ability to comprehend what you read. Guess what troll, she doesn't have to go to that hospital.

 

[glenn1]

TH "logic" in action: I go up to a woman and demand she have sex with me. She declines, tells me to ask someone else instead and that if I continue to ask her she'll kick me in the nuts. So I go to a court requesting a restraining order against getting kicked in the nuts and demanding she have sex with me instead. All under the legal rationale that "we have a basic human right to make decisions about what happens to our body," and what I want for my body is to have sex with that woman.