Hospital sought court order to force C Section

Morag

Ireland over the last 15 years has had a massive rise in C sections.
World Health Org stats that C Sections should be between 5 and 15% of births.
Currently in Ireland its 28% of births.

C sections are more expensive, the costs of the procedure the longer stay in hospital and they are usually scheduled.

1990 the rate of C Sections was 10% as the country got richer more people got health insurance and there was a greater demand for more services and private patients who give birth create more revenue for the hospitals and scheduled C sections mean they can manage their resources better.

Indeed the level of intervention and hurrying along of even a 'normal' delivery, and how long someone is let go 'over' before being induced has to do with scheduling how many deliveries and when, due to our maternity services being so stretched.

I would never want to have a C section, I know women who have and hated the length of the arduous recovery time. We do not support VBAC as much as we should in this country. I can understand if that woman had of wanted to avoid another C section and wanted a normal birth.

http://www.maternityandinfant.ie/pregnancy-mum/rising-number-csections/

The Risks

Some of the effects associated with C-sections

For the mother:

Increase of time spent in hospital by two to three days.
Increased risk of uterine infection.
More intense and longer lasting pain.
Lower ratings to the mother’s birth experience.
Increased risk of bladder injury.
Increased rate of hysterectomy.
Increased rate of hospital re-admission.

For the infant:

Surgical cuts.
Respiratory problems.
Increased challenge of establishing breastfeeding.

40 to 42 weeks is full term but when so few scans are taken as a matter of course in this country due to lack of resourced, dating scans are often wrong.

What is interesting is that the brief for the hospital was using the 8th amendment to argue the case. Irish law is case law, we ladies are lucky a judgement was not handed down for we may see more irish women being ordered to do things for the sake of the 'unborn' by the courts.

I think it is horrendous that the medical professionals too often dismiss women and their concerns. The notion that we are ignorant and over emotional and can't understand what is happening to our own bodies in pregnancy is often rife in hospitals.

There are no water births in any Irish hospital, birth plans get laughed at and they are trying to make home births illegal, so that you have to have your baby delivered as bests suits the consultants and hospital staff.

The fight around reproductive rights in this country is just starting.
We have already had the HSE say that if you are planning a home birth the garda have to know, and they keep narrowing when a woman can have a home birth.

http://theantiroom.wordpress.com/category/family/page/4/

A healthy labouring woman, fully dilated, is ready to start pushing. She has taken the responsibility of informing herself of the pros and cons of hospital and home-birth and has chosen the best and safest option for herself and her family; a home-birth. She is eagerly awaiting the birth of this child – her fourth – and is happy that her labour is progressing smoothly. She feels powerful and energised. Confident of her body’s ability to birth, this woman is surrounded by carefully chosen birth attendants: Chief among them is her midwife, who has cared for this woman since the 8th week of her pregnancy.

This midwife has met with this woman and her family a dozen times during the pregnancy. She has nurtured her and her family throughout. Her kindness, care and experience have helped create an atmosphere of calm. She has met with the family in the comfort, safety and privacy of their own home and answered all their questions. She has worked hard and diligently with the family to achieve the optimum birth. She has earned their trust.

Just as the pregnant woman is about to start pushing her baby into the world, there is a loud rapping at the door (in spite of the note pinned to it asking callers to return later, as a birth is in progress). When the bewildered father-to-be answers the door, he is confronted by uniformed Gardaí. They have come to arrest the midwife. The HSE has decided that her attendance at this birth is illegal because the woman’s last baby (her third) was over 9lbs in weight.

This midwife faces up to 10 years in prison and a €160,000 fine for exercising her profession to the best of her ability.

Sounds crazy, right? Well, that’s exactly the scenario that could be enacted up and down the country if the HSE has its way. The Department of Health is currently preparing to put a Bill before the Dáil which would virtually outlaw homebirth in Ireland and leave self-employed midwives at the risk of being vilified, arrested, fined and imprisoned.

The proposed Bill would strip midwives, who attend women outside the criteria dreamt up by the HSE, of insurance. Most of the criteria currently proposed by the HSE are not evidence-based and violate a woman’s right to make an informed choice with regard to where she births.

These guidelines and sections form an architecture of coercion. Mothers who fall outside the draconian and prejudicial terms laid down by the State may be forcibly hospitalised. Midwives who, like other professionals, seek to exercise their autonomy may face a jail sentence of up to 10 years. Draft HSE guidelines recently circulated go so far as to define the Garda Siochána as ‘relevant stakeholders’ in home birth.

‘Section 40 of the Bill, in effect, undermines women’s rights by withdrawing access to midwifery care in childbirth. Women have the right to appropriate health care, to bodily integrity and to self-determination. They also have the right to decline medical intervention. This Bill effectively denies women the freedom to give birth as they wish’, said Dr Krysia Lynch of the Home Birth Association.

Self-employed midwife Philomena Canning puts it most succinctly: ‘The Bill, as it stands, threatens the future of midwifery, criminalises autonomous midwifery practice, conflicts with a midwife’s duty of care and denies midwives the right to run their own profession, a right enjoyed by all other health professionals in law.’

‘The Bill places the midwife in an intolerable dilemma,’ she continues. ‘She must decide whether to assist the mother under circumstances where she is no longer indemnified––and possibly be jailed for doing so – or stand idly by. Withdrawing care from a mother who suddenly ceases to conform to insurance criteria in mid-labour is an appalling vista.’

I sit here and wonder how I have ended up raising daughters in a country where women’s and children’s rights can be systematically trampled over by its own government. This is a witch-hunt against midwives who want to practice their profession. It is another attempt by the government of Ireland to violate women’s human rights. It is another example of the Irish government telling Irish women that they must do what they are told – that they must conform and be ‘good girls’. It is another example of the Irish government deciding it knows what is best – even if international research and evidence does not support their stance.

I am shocked and saddened that Irish society has progressed so little. This treatment of women, by the Irish government, is not a million miles from what they did to women in the infamous ‘laundries’. I am disgusted at the lack of respect this proposed Bill shows for women and children.

This issue is not about home birth versus hospital birth. It is not about hippy women ‘refusing to listen’ to doctors. It is not about ‘stupid’ women refusing medical care. It is not about women who ‘just want to be different’. It is about the proposed violation of the rights and integrity of the women and children in this society. Peace on earth begins with peace at birth. Women must feel respected and at peace with their decisions when they give birth. They must be allowed to make informed decisions based on their own histories and their own research.

Let us not forget that this proposed Bill is also unconstitutional: Article 40.3.1 of Bunreacht na hEireann and Article 3 of the European Convention of Human Rights state that ‘free and informed consent is the cornerstone of medical treatment.’ For consent to be free and informed, it must be based on information and choice, neither of which feature in the proposed legislation. Thousands of Irish men and Irish women stood by and allowed the government – aided and abetted them, even – to treat Irish women and children despicably in ‘homes’ and ‘laundries’ and ‘under State care’ until the 1980s. Are you going to stand by and allow them to repeat their contemptuous treatment of women and children?

If not, you can voice your opposition by signing the petition to have the Bill amended: http://www.gopetition.com/petition/39693.html

All of my parents siblings were born at home all 18 of them and not a bother,
but birthing is big business ladies but you won't get much customer service.


http://www.maternityandinfant.ie/pregnancy-mum/rising-number-csections/

Morag

Morag wrote: »

Ireland over the last 15 years has had a massive rise in C sections.
World Health Org stats that C Sections should be between 5 and 15% of births.
Currently in Ireland its 28% of births.

C sections are more expensive, the costs of the procedure the longer stay in hospital and they are usually scheduled.

1990 the rate of C Sections was 10% as the country got richer more people got health insurance and there was a greater demand for more services and private patients who give birth create more revenue for the hospitals and scheduled C sections mean they can manage their resources better.

Indeed the level of intervention and hurrying along of even a 'normal' delivery, and how long someone is let go 'over' before being induced has to do with scheduling how many deliveries and when, due to our maternity services being so stretched.

I would never want to have a C section, I know women who have and hated the length of the arduous recovery time. We do not support VBAC as much as we should in this country. I can understand if that woman had of wanted to avoid another C section and wanted a normal birth.

http://www.maternityandinfant.ie/pregnancy-mum/rising-number-csections/



40 to 42 weeks is full term but when so few scans are taken as a matter of course in this country due to lack of resourced, dating scans are often wrong.

What is interesting is that the brief for the hospital was using the 8th amendment to argue the case. Irish law is case law, we ladies are lucky a judgement was not handed down for we may see more irish women being ordered to do things for the sake of the 'unborn' by the courts.

I think it is horrendous that the medical professionals too often dismiss women and their concerns. The notion that we are ignorant and over emotional and can't understand what is happening to our own bodies in pregnancy is often rife in hospitals.

There are no water births in any Irish hospital, birth plans get laughed at and they are trying to make home births illegal, so that you have to have your baby delivered as bests suits the consultants and hospital staff.

The fight around reproductive rights in this country is just starting.
We have already had the HSE say that if you are planning a home birth the garda have to know, and they keep narrowing when a woman can have a home birth.

http://theantiroom.wordpress.com/category/family/page/4/



All of my parents siblings were born at home all 18 of them and not a bother,
but birthing is big business ladies but you won't get much customer service.


http://www.maternityandinfant.ie/pregnancy-mum/rising-number-csections/

That article is from a blog? Perhaps it should be read bearing in mind that its someones opinion, and that evidence supporting many of the assertions would be, I suspect, difficult to come by.

To be honest, it reeks of bias and is not what I'd consider balanced.

I've never heard of anyones' birth plan being laughed at. Although I suppose some people's expectations will be a little unrealistic.

clairefontaine

Candie,

Birthplans are a delusion. They don't matter, it's just a daydream written down, that's all.

Morag, I suspect a lot of this could be avoided if hospitals were more vigilant with their dating scans.

Also some malpractice insurance wont cover vbacs so some doctors refuse to do them.

Under the constitution the unborn are citizens and need to be protected as such. Now with the children's referendum, do they have the same right as children - which really means more state rights over them?

Morag

It was also reported in the pregnacny forum here when it happened.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=69068908

http://www.aimsireland.com/news/?topic=newsBulletin#_nbItem9

PRESS RELEASE
November 15, 2010
Gárdaí ‘relevant stakeholders’ in home birth—HSE
Birth lobby and midwifery groups have denounced draft HSE guidelines suggesting that Gárdaí might be brought to the scene of a home birth should a mother exercise her right to make an informed decision that conflicts with HSE terms. ‘These draft guidelines interlock ominously with sections of the Nurses and Midwives Bill currently going through the Dáil’, said Marie O’Connor of the National Birth Alliance.

‘Taken together, these guidelines and sections form an architecture of coercion. Mothers who fall outside the draconian and prejudicial terms laid down for the State home birth service may be forcibly hospitalised, while midwives who, like other professionals, seek to exercise their autonomy may face a jail sentence of up to 10 years’. Draft HSE guidelines recently circulated go so far as to define the Gárda Siochána as ‘relevant stakeholders’ in home birth.

‘Section 40 of the Bill, in effect, undermines women’s rights by withdrawing access to midwifery care in childbirth at a time when that care may be critical. Women have a right to appropriate health care, to bodily integrity and self- determination. They also have right to decline medical intervention. The Bill effectively denies women the freedom to give birth as they wish’, said Dr Krysia Lynch of the Home Birth Association.

The groups are looking for amendments to Sections 24 and 40 of the Bill. They say the legislation, as drafted, will be ‘catastrophic’ in its effects. Self-employed midwife Philomena Canning says: ‘the Bill, as it stands, threatens the future of midwifery, criminalises autonomous midwifery practice, conflicts with a midwife’s duty of care and denies midwives the right to run their own profession, a right enjoyed by all other health professionals in law. HSE are using the State indemnity scheme as a vehicle to control the practice of self-employed midwives. The Bill effectively strips them of their right to private practice.’
Jene Kelly of the Association for Improvements in the Maternity Services (Ireland) says the Bill is ‘unfair, unjust and discriminatory’.

‘ It treats midwives differently from medical practitioners and treats self-employed midwives differently from hospital midwives. Mothers and babies will be the losers. The Bill effectively removes women’s freedom to opt out of the active management machine. Choice in childbirth for women requires all midwives to be treated equally before the law.’

Philomena Canning said the Bill, unless amended, would render the practice of self-employed midwives in the community ‘nightmarish’. ‘The Bill places the midwife in an intolerable dilemma: whether to assist the mother under circumstances where she is no longer indemnified––and possibly be jailed for doing so under Section 40 ––or else stand idly by. Withdrawing care from a mother who suddenly ceases to conform to insurance criteria in mid-labour is an appalling vista.’

Other groups supporting the amendments to Sections 24 and 40 include the INMO (Midwives' Section), the Community Midwives’ Association, the Trinity College Birth Project Group, the Doulas’ Association of Ireland and Clare Birth Choice.
Inquiries:
Krysia Lynch Home Birth Association of Ireland 087 7543751
Jene Kelly, Association for Improvements in the Maternity Services (Ireland) 087 6819095
Philomena Canning, self-employed midwife 087 2900017
Marie O'Connor, National Birth Alliance 086 8180254

Victor

krankykitty wrote: »

Didn't know that about tuberculosis. Forgot about the mental health acts...

Apparently there is a guy who has been in Peamount hospital for something like 30 years as his strain of TB is particularly contagious.

eviltwin wrote: »

From little things like being referred to a "mum" the whole time rather than by my name

Whatever about mum -v- mam, ma, mom, mother, etc., that is the proper way to do it.

"Nurse", "doctor", "care assistant", "minister", "deputy", "garda", "councillor", "manager" are all job titles that are objective ways to get around addressing people by their name and avoids the risk of getting names wrong in the heat of the moment, where more that two people in a room might have the same name. In other settings it also avoids allowing insults.

clairefontaine wrote: »

So the state has bottom line control of not only your body but your kids too.

Um, neither you nor the state own the child. The child's interests do need to be looked after.

Morag

Candie wrote: »

I've never heard of anyones' birth plan being laughed at. Although I suppose some people's expectations will be a little unrealistic.

I have people I know and posters here in the Pregnancy forum.

clairefontaine

clairefontaine wrote: »

Candie,

Birthplans are a delusion. They don't matter, it's just a daydream written down, that's all.

Perhaps in your experience, but of all my friends who have had children, their birth plans weren't daydreams, and of the one who was disappointed, I would describe her expectations as being very unrealistic.

Anyway, I'm not a mother so I won't comment further on the viability of birth plans

dollybird2

My birth plan was laughed at. It consisted of the wish/plan for a drug free labour with as little intervention as possible. I was told that a drug free labour is daft, and that it is like getting a tooth pulled without anaesthetic.

My labour resulted in getting to 8cm without pain relief and a horrible, rushed, scary emergency section. I'd do it all over again for my daughter.

Scruffles

there was a woman in ireland who recently was actualy refused life saving surgery because she had intelectual disability,unfortunately am not able to find the article but it was in a irish national rag.
they tried to say this woman; who had lived independantly all her life with some support was void of all mental capacity and unable to give her word for the op [breast cancer removal].


am also intelectualy disabled and have lived with many other females also with it who were forcibly kept on the pill against their wishes; one of them wanted a baby and was very aware of what she woud have to do for it every day but they decided she wasnt capable of looking after herself never mind a baby.
another lady had managed to get to the stage of having a baby,but as soon as she was born the baby was taken away from her,she was a capable mum.
and yet we have so many rubbish but non disabled parents being able to have kids.


every person shoud be made as informed as they possibly can be when it comes to having treatment in their lives,but the decision to have it or not shoud be upto them unless they truly are in an acute mental break or void of any mental capacity [not someone who can be supported in different ways to understand]-doctor/specialists/social workers etc shoud not be the ones making decisions over our choices,we are not owned by them and they are not god.

lazygal

I have not only heard but seen midwives dismissing birth plans or questions about birth preferences at antenatal classes. I know women who refused episiotomies but were ignored or overruled. I know women who's waters were broken before they had time to query what was happening. I know women who were openly told by their doctor that they would have to have a section because he didn't want to risk being sued should anything go wrong.

The Irish maternity system is not world class or anything like it. There's hospitals now not performing anomaly scans at 20 weeks, which means a woman can go to 34 weeks before she finds out there's a serious issue. I was diagnosed with some medical issues at that scan, but if I hadn't had one there could have been a serious risk to me and the baby - I'm not a high risk pregnancy so there's no reason to give me an early scan in some hospitals.

I'm currently expecting my second child and I've a high likelihood of needing a second csection. I'm in the fortunate position of being able to chose to return to the consultant who delivered my first child and have private care. Its not PC to say it but I'm going private again because I don't want to risk some of the things that happened to friends of mine in the public system. One woman overheard a midwife saying she wasn't going to 'bother' getting a consultant in to check something on her because he was with a private patient - the woman ended up with a forceps delivery and a third degree tear.

meeeeh

I haven't notice much difference between private and public. If anything more tests (the ones that were supposed to be done) were done when I went public. I was also lucky to get private room on both occasions. My birthing plan had only one thing on it: to get any pain relief possible. Both births went without complications and I had no complaints at all. When I went private it was over so quickly that my ob missed the whole thing so the next time I didn't even bother.

Talking to my brothers wife and some friends they had some more tests done and they were a lot stricter with them regarding weight gain. But it is a lot harder to get epidural and they dislike immensely home births. The survival stats are pretty good too so I don't know which system is better. Personally I don't care how am I addressed or how nice is the personnel as long as my child and I are well taken care of.

I remember ending in hospital for different issue in the middle of the night and needing stitches. I had an argument with the consultant, was in considerate pain because they could only local anaesthetic and there was bickering with consultant through the whole procedure. (I'm a wuss for pain). The next morning another very sympathetic consultant was attending and all I could think was why didn't I have her previous night. As it turned out she had fairly bad reputation for her fondness for alcohol and generally not being great. And the other one was supposed to be one of the best in his area in the country. Later it was commented what a good job he did to avoid any subsequent complications. After that I could make some allowance for his rudeness.

Morag

Glad you had a good experience meeeeh but not every woman does.

meeeeh

Morag wrote: »

Glad you had a good experience meeeeh but not every woman does.

Some women go into it with very unrealistic expectations. Birth is messy and anything but pleasant anyway.

I just wanted to point out that private care is IMO way to overpriced for what you get and probably offers more comfort to person going private than actually that much better care. It probably depends on circumstances and hospital though.

I have no complaints with maternity care recieved but I was not so impressed when needing my third and fourth D&C. Nothing to do with religion but more to do with the organisational system and inefficient work practices. I'm not very demanding but I'm not patient and I do stand my corner when I think I'm being ignored and can be difficult. I don't want to be cheerleader for HSE but just trying to add some ballance to "Irish maternity system is third rate" arguments.

iguana

XxMCRxBabyxX wrote: »

IMO: The point where a child has high (85% - 100%) chance of living outside of the womb. 8/9 months I suppose. I don't see that as unfair.

The mother has a right to consent over her body but intervention should be done if she is willing to risk her child's life by evoking those rights.

And what if a 12 year old needed a bone marrow to live and it's mother was a match, yet for some reason the mother doesn't want to donate. Do we force her to do so? Do we force a matching sibling? If no family member is a match, do we force a complete stranger who is? The 12 year old clearly has the same right to life as everyone else but does that mean they have the right to someone else's bodily integrity in order to save them? If the answer is no, then why is it any different for pregnant women?

xLexie

iguana wrote: »

And what if a 12 year old needed a bone marrow to live and it's mother was a match, yet for some reason the mother doesn't want to donate. Do we force her to do so? Do we force a matching sibling? If no family member is a match, do we force a complete stranger who is? The 12 year old clearly has the same right to life as everyone else but does that mean they have the right to someone else's bodily integrity in order to save them? If the answer is no, then why is it any different for pregnant women?

Because the pregnant woman decided to go through with the pregnancy thus understands the risk?

krankykitty

xLexie wrote: »

Because the pregnant woman decided to go through with the pregnancy thus understands the risk?

So because a woman decides to go through a pregnancy, she is effectively consenting to any procedure that the medics see fit?

meeeeh

iguana wrote: »

And what if a 12 year old needed a bone marrow to live and it's mother was a match, yet for some reason the mother doesn't want to donate. Do we force her to do so? Do we force a matching sibling? If no family member is a match, do we force a complete stranger who is? The 12 year old clearly has the same right to life as everyone else but does that mean they have the right to someone else's bodily integrity in order to save them? If the answer is no, then why is it any different for pregnant women?

She had a C section already so there is a likleyhood she will need another one. She knew that in advance and I think it's extremely selfish to endanger your own life and life of a child just because you don't fancy another one. Provided there are good medical reasons for it (the judge did not have to legislate in this case).

meeeeh

krankykitty wrote: »

So because a woman decides to go through a pregnancy, she is effectively consenting to any procedure that the medics see fit?

No but it would be a lot less traumatic to have an abortion than giving birth to a dead child. C section is very standard procedure and a small price to pay for your own and child's health.

pwurple

Morag wrote: »

There are no water births in any Irish hospital, birth plans get laughed at and they are trying to make home births illegal, so that you have to have your baby delivered as bests suits the consultants and hospital staff.

I wanted to jump in here and squash this one. There are no water births in Ireland since a baby drowned in a 'birthing pool' a few years ago. No primate in the wild gives birth underwater, because it's just plain stupid to do so. We breathe air, not water. (example A: newborn death.)

It's these kinds of uninformed nutjob requests for dangerous quackery that undermine pregnant women's opinions in the first place. And it's possibly what happened here.

Mommy doesn't always know best in every situation. There is no magical goddess that protects mother and baby based entirely on whims or intuitions. I know I'm am wording this strongly, but going against strong medical advice to do utterly batshiz dangerous activities, that are known to kill women and their infants does so much harm on so many levels. It harms the women and children themselves, to the medical professionals abilty to work when they take the risk and something goes wrong, and to the rest of us because of a stereotype it creates.

And every one of these nutters that goes through the system reinforces some medical professionals opinion that women haven't a bloody clue about their own safety, and completely undermines our ability to be taken seriously.

Morag

pwurple wrote: »

I wanted to jump in here and squash this one. There are no water births in Ireland since a baby drowned in a 'birthing pool' a few years ago. No primate in the wild gives birth underwater, because it's just plain stupid to do so. We breathe air, not water. (example A: newborn death.)

It's these kinds of uninformed nutjob requests for dangerous quackery that undermine pregnant women's opinions in the first place. And it's possibly what happened here.

I know of 9 women who have had water births (some are members of this site whom you are insulting) and at home and all the babies survived just fine. If you extend your 'logic' then no one should give birth in hospitals cos babies die there too during birth.

The reason the water birthing units in maternity unites are not currently in use are insurance issues, but you can still have a water birth if you choose to have a home birth if you are a suitable candidate.

pwurple wrote: »

And every one of these nutters that goes through the system reinforces some medical professionals opinion that women haven't a bloody clue about their own safety, and completely undermines our ability to be taken seriously.

Actually the notion that women can't be trusted durng birth goes back to the twilight births during the 1900s when women were dosed with anesthetics.

http://www.ourbodiesourselves.org/book/companion.asp?id=21&compID=75

We as a country are aprox 30 years behind other westernised countries when it comes to ob/gyn due to the major hand the RC Chruch has had in running our maternity hospitals.

meeeeh

Morag wrote: »

We as a country are aprox 30 years behind other westernised countries when it comes to ob/gyn due to the major hand the RC Chruch has had in running our maternity hospitals.

Any stats for this?

clairefontaine

Defending a woman's sovreignty over her body doesn't mean you will always agree with her choices, just as defending any right doesn't mean you will back up the results of those rights, but the right has to be defended even if you don't agree with how it excersized.

You really want to give doctors the right to cut you open without your consent?

Very dangerous precedent imo.

krankykitty

clairefontaine wrote: »

You really want to give doctors the right to cut you open without your consent?

Very dangerous precedent imo.

Or indeed do a variety of other procedures, simply because you are pregnant. I don't think this is limited to Ireland by the way, the UK based Mumsnet forum contains a lot of people's experiences of having waters broken/internals/episiotomies carried out without consent at the "lesser" end of the scale to a (perhaps medically indicated) abdominal surgery.

The fact of the matter is that unless you are in an immediate life threatening situation and cannot advocate for yourself, someone carrying out a procedure on you without your consent or without explaining it at the very least is assault.

pwurple

Morag wrote: »

I know of 9 women who have had water births (some are members of this site whom you are insulting) and at home and all the babies survived just fine.

Yes, cos that's exactly what I said... that all babies die in water births. :rolleyes:
They can't get insurance precisly because there is a history of water births unnecessarily resulting in newborns drowning. These are children who would be alive today if their mother had not taken that risk. How educated they were about it, I don't know. But instead of birthday parties and babygrows there was a funeral with a tiny white casket, and a cemetary plot to visit.

Sure, if they are at home they can take whatever risk they want, no insurance or safety protocols to follow there, but it's not going be the case in a hospital.

To campaign for it to be the case in hospitals, is, in my opinion, lunacy. For the reasons in my previous post.... potential harm to themselves, their children, the medical profession, and other women.

krankykitty

Is there not a use for water pools in labour as a pain relief method though (for the labour part not the actual delivery) ?

pwurple

krankykitty wrote: »

The fact of the matter is that unless you are in an immediate life threatening situation and cannot advocate for yourself, someone carrying out a procedure on you without your consent or without explaining it at the very least is assault.

Absolutely, however a court order was required here. There is no suggestion anywhere that a court order should not be needed.

Consent is vitally important.

clairefontaine

Campaign for water pools. Oh gosh.

I'd start by campaigning for higher hygeine standards!

Good luck when you can't even choose what position to give birth in in a hospital.

IvyTheTerrible

pwurple wrote: »

Absolutely, however a court order was required here. There is no suggestion anywhere that a court order should not be needed.

Consent is vitally important.

There actually wasn't, the woman gave her consent before the court order was made.

Morag

meeeeh wrote: »

Any stats for this?

Lack of terminations for fatal fetal abnormalities or for inevitable miscarriage to start with.

Morag

krankykitty wrote: »

Is there not a use for water pools in labour as a pain relief method though (for the labour part not the actual delivery) ?

Not currently anywhere in the country, not even in the few midwife led units, you'd have to be having a home birth.