Irish women and Symphysiotomy

Badhb

Shocking report on women who were given no option other than to endure such a horrific procedure as symphiosity just now on Vincent Browne.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symphysiotomy

Apparently, it was considered by some very catholic doctors as a means of limiting women viewing caesarian sections as a "birth control" method. As in, you can usually only have 3-4 caesarian sections in a lifetime.

Horrendous stories of what many women were forced to endure in this country, without proper information, their consent and with horrible lifelong health reprecussions like incontinence, not to mention 5 weeks in hospital one woman spoke about, with her split pelvis.

All due to religious determination over a woman's health.
These women have been forced to endure the most unbelievable hell, and they are still fighting to get recognition for it.

wmpdd3

Even when this was discussed in 2010, I dont remember it being mentioned the reason Caesareans were not offered.
I thought it was this procedure or the death of the baby or the mother, I never realised it was a common alternative to a Caesarean for a Catholic reason.

Why was it more common in Our Lady Of Lourdes?

What does the Catholic church have against C-Sections? I know nothing about Catholicism.

I was breech and my Mother had to have an emergency Caesarian (in England!). Gave birth to my brother a few years later naturally, though.

Had to look up Symphysiotomy to be honest Sounds horrific.

Fluorescence

How is a c-section a form of contraceptive???

Dolbert

It's not, but the thinking is that since you're only supposed to have a max of three in your lifetime, it would deter you from having more kids and thereby encourage contraception. The fact that this was practiced on women for no other reason is barbaric, I actually winced the first time I read about it

rainbow kirby

From the 2010 documentary, it was often done as something of a punishment for unmarried mothers too - one of the victims they interviewed was only 14 at the time when it was done. That's just so incredibly depressing

LadyMayBelle

That's horrific to just read about... poor women. Would like to listen to that report on Vincent Brown if it's available,

meganj

Badhb wrote: »

Apparently, it was considered by some very catholic doctors as a means of limiting women viewing caesarian sections as a "birth control" method. As in, you can usually only have 3-4 caesarian sections in a lifetime

From what I've read/heard/seen most of the doctors that used it claim it was because if a woman had a difficult birth because of the risk of having caesarian sections during that time. The contraception issue comes up because at that time contraception and sterilization was not allowed, so a woman who could not have birth without complications was given (without consent) a symphysiotomy, in order for the subsequent births not to be difficult because she could not a) avoid getting pregnant due to the lack of contraceptives and b) could not be sterilised.

I'm not saying that they did this for the women, or for the good of the women, but the connection between catholic doctors viewing a caesarian as birth control is unfounded in anything I've read.

wmpdd3 wrote: »

Even when this was discussed in 2010, I dont remember it being mentioned the reason Caesareans were not offered.
I thought it was this procedure or the death of the baby or the mother, I never realised it was a common alternative to a Caesarean for a Catholic reason.

Why was it more common in Our Lady Of Lourdes?

More common in Lourdes (Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital in Drogheda (348), the National Maternity Hospital (281) and the Coombe in Dublin (242)) and it went on until 1984 even though it had stopped nearly everywhere in the world. According to the IT:

'The report suggests the reason for the continued practice was linked to the “unswervingly Catholic ethos” of the hospital at the time, as described in Ms Justice Maureen Harding Clark’s report into high rates of hysterectomy operations there. The hospital had an absolute ban on artificial contraception, even when it became both legal and broadly accepted in other hospitals.'

I think it's absolutely horrific that they did this to these women, and the fact that they did it for non-medical reasons due to a catholic ethos and didn't even tell the women is scandal.

Some of these women spoke about finding out later in life what had happened to them after seeing doctors for chronic pain. Horrifying.

sparky32

Symphysiotomy was a procedure that was carried out in Ireland up until 1992. It was seen as being religiously motivated and was carried out in mainly Catholic countries.
The Catholic Church was hugely against the use of contraception as in their eyes there should not be a limit to family size.
C-Sections were seen to limit family size to 3 or 4,whereas with Symphysiotomy there was no limits.
Archbishop McQuaid viewed "preventing births" as a "crime".
Medical professionals had to sign contracts which went along with these Catholic teachings and practices.

It is terrible to think that this procedure is still being carried out in some parts of the world.
I think the Catholic Church really have a lot to answer for.

LittleBook

We had a thread on this back in 2010 when a documentary came out about the practice, horrific stuff.

There was an article entitled "Symphysiotomy Was Seen As A Gateway To Childbearing Without Limits" in TheJournal.ie by the chairwoman of Survivors of Symphysiotomy recently which made it clear that this was very much about birth control, or rather avoiding birth control.

Ireland was the only country in the developed world to practise this discarded surgery in the mid to late 20th century.

Caesarean section had been the standard treatment for difficult births in Ireland since the end of the 1930s. However, doctors’ preference for symphysiotomy saw 1,500 of these 18th century operations being performed from 1944 onwards, mostly in Catholic private hospitals.

The surgery was an abuse of power, a pre-emptive surgical strike against the practice of birth control by obstetricians who disliked Caesarean section, on account of its association with what Archbishop McQuaid termed the ‘crime of birth-prevention’. Undergoing four such operations was widely seen as the upper safety limit. Symphysiotomy, in contrast, was viewed as a gateway to childbearing without limitation.

Long shunned by doctors on account of its dangers, symphysiotomy was revived in 1944 at Holles St Hospital as a replacement for Caesarean section in certain cases. Pregnant women were used as guinea pigs there in the 1940s and ’50s and this experimentation reached bizarre heights at the Lourdes Hospital, Drogheda, then under the ownership of the Medical Missionaries of Mary.

A draft report which was leaked to the Irish Times today states:

one of the reasons it was used was to obey laws influenced by the Catholic Church that banned contraception and sterilisation.

In fact, one woman who recently won a high court case was subjected to the procedure after she had given birth by caesarean.

The judge said the hospital had argued the symphysiotomy procedure arose because there was a significant body of medical opinion at the time that was anti-Caesarean operations.

The reason for this, apparently, was that a woman could only be expected to undergo a relatively limited number of such operations and it was anticipated they would therefore need a few of them in the expectation women would have a lot of children, he said.

In such circumstances, doctors would have to advise women not to have any more children, which meant they might “be tempted to use artificial contraception” or even look for sterilisation, the judge said.

There is no doubt in my mind that this barbaric practice was inextricably linked to the catholic church's views on contraception and birth control and their control of maternity hospitals.

sunbeam

The Catholic 'ethos' seemed to have been implemented differently in the UK compared to here. I have several cousins born by caesarian in UK Catholic hospitals during the 50s and 60s and it never seemed to be an issue. At the same time one of my aunts here in Ireland went through several extremely difficult births, losing two babies in the process and a caesarian was never offered to her.

I was born by caesarian in 72 (in Ireland). My mother's obstetrician was pretty much as devoutly Catholic as they come-had her hands blessed by the pope and moved back from the UK when abortion was legalised there. Yet she had no problems in advising my mother well in advance that a caesarian would be for the best, given her many health problems. In the end there was an emergency and without it we probably would both have died. She also had no problem with advising her that any future pregnancy would place her life at risk. I shudder to think what would have happened if I had been conceived twenty years earlier. :-(

rainbow kirby

Btw, if anyone is interested, the Vincent Browne discussion on this is up on the TV3 player now. (episode from 12/06)

Well worth watching.

Ambersky

Woops commented on tonights 14/6/12 show. Really harrowing story though, sickening difficult to listen to its so awful.

LittleBook

LittleBook wrote: »

In fact, one woman who recently won a high court case was subjected to the procedure after she had given birth by caesarean.

Supreme Court Finds Symphisiotomy Was Unjustified and Unwarranted but Reduces Compensation

A bittersweet victory

[Mr Justice John McMenamin] said Ms Kearney's testimony about the effect the operation had had on her was understated if anything.

However, he said she had carried on what in many senses was a relatively normal life despite her medical problems.

He said while in no sense underestimating the very serious nature of the injuries and their effects, he found they fell short of the very highest category of awards - where people have suffered catastrophic injuries.

He upheld the finding that the hospital was liable for her injuries and wrong even by the standards of the time, but the court reduced the amount awarded in damages.

Speaking outside court, Ms Kearney said she was delighted to be vindicated by the Supreme Court, saying the case had never been about the money.

She said that the physical pain would stay with her. She will go to bed tonight with the pain, she said, and wake up in the morning with the pain.

God it's just so horrendous, it's hard to even comprehend

lazygal

I recently had my baby in Holles Street. As my baby was in a complicated position I had to have a c-section. Overall it was a very positive and successful experience and even though I never though I'd have a c-section I am very happy with the system.

If I had presented with my baby in this position 40 or 50 years ago, I could (and very, very likely would) have ended up with a symphysiotomy. The thought haunted me during the last two months of pregnancy when it became apparent that I'd need a section. I feel incredibly lucky that I 'escaped' a procedure like this.

dublin99

From thejournal.ie:

"Woman in intensive care bringing case against hospital over ‘unwarranted’ symphysiotomy"

http://www.thejournal.ie/symphysiotomy-high-court-1559459-Jul2014/

It is horrific what these women went through, some suffered pain, incontinence etc for the rest of their lives. And now Holles Street adopt such an obnoxious attitude to the court case basically hoping that by delaying and dragging it out long enough, the poor woman (and the court case) will die. They even threatened her with costs! Is that the best our leading hospital can do? Maybe the Master thinks that any compensation will come out of her salary top up??? Or will she get a bonus if the poor woman dies before she has her case heard? The whole thing is disgraceful.