My mother gave birth to me via emergency C-section after 18 intense hours of labor (it took the doctors that long to realize my mom's hips were too narrow for giving birth), when her (and my) vitals began to tank. My younger sister was a planned C-section, both because of hospital policy (not allowing lady partsl births after a C-section) and because there was almost no chance my mom could give birth to her lady partslly, even if she had wanted to.
On the other hand, my sister-in-law had a C-section with my nephew, because he had been diagnosed with gastroschisis. But four years later, she lady partslly gave birth to my beautiful niece, with no problems whatsoever. As you can see, the hospital had no such policy about the C-Sections.
Whether or not someone wants a C-Section, that can be left to debate. That is not the issue I found in this article. The issue I found is that someone compared a C-Section to rape! How on Earth can you justify something like that? I understand that some women feel incredibly disappointed that their wishes aren't being taken into consideration, but the fact of the matter is that hospitals have these policies for a reason. Yes, part of it is to cover their own tails and prevent lawsuits, but why would there be lawsuits in the first place? Risks and/or harm to the patient? Gee, there's a thought. Rape is an act of violence, and of dominating power over your victim. How is that in any way comparable?
My personal opinion... Yes, when I do have children, I would like to give birth lady partslly. But if I ever find myself in a place where my medical staff are telling me that I need to have a C-Section, do it! Anything to keep my baby and I safe (in that order, for me at least).
Anyone else think that this woman is far out of reach in her logic? Or do you think she's on to something?
Specializes in ER and family advanced nursing practice.
I can understand the sentiment of a person wanting control over what happens to their body (and the body of their unborn child). One thing the article does not give though is background information on the hospital. If it truly is the only hospital around, their resources could very well be limited. There is data out there that suggests that hospitals that perform certain procedures more often usually have better outcomes in regards to those procedures. So the hospital's claim that they don't feel equipped to do emergent c-sections could be legit.
I don't know about the rape connection. As a former police officer, paramedic, and ER RN, I have worked with many rape victims. In my head I just can't seem to make the comparison work, but I guess I understand that others might. What does stick out to me is the notion that the patient (who in reality is a consumer) thinks she can control hospital policy. The hospital has said up front what its policy is. That is part of informed consent. She knows what her options are. My opinion here is that she should make other arrangements. I do acknowledge that might be easier said than done if resources are limited in terms of finance or geography.
Isn't that the only hospital in Page? How are they not equipped for emergency c-sections?
Here's a genius solution: Nurse midwife can help her give birth at home OR she can take her saggy butt to a different hospital instead of acting like a spoiled brat screaming for a toy.
Ignoring the fact that she doesn't have a lot of selection in hospitals where she lives, the insults in your comment are uncalled for.
Forced entry into someone's body= rape in my book.
I can easily see the connection and would feel the same way.
And to say she's whining about a toy? She is calling attention to the fact that her rights as a patient, as a mother, as a human, are being taken away. All over silly hospital policy? It makes absolutely no sense.
The hospital should be ashamed and she should definitely take her business elsewhere, as should other local mothers- especially since this hospital has admitted that they are not equipped to deal with emergencies that could arise. Good for her for bringing this issue to light.
Isn't the objective of delivery to have a healthy mother and child?
She needs to find another hospital. Then if she needs a section, she should be grateful that they were able to do it.
Too many women are today placing too much emphasis on the method rather than the outcome of delivery.
The "method" of delivery can have a lot to DO with the outcome of delivery- for both mother and baby. Risks of surgery shouldn't be taken so lightly.
This woman has had three children- first was lady partsl, second was c/s, and third was lady partsl (VBAC). Now she should consent to another c/s, just because the hospital has decided that they would now prefer that? When just two years ago they "let" her VBAC?
This woman was forced to have something done to her body against her wishes. I have heard of woman that refuse c-sections and then are forced by court order to get one. What other medical procedure is forced upon a patient? Just because a member and lady parts was not involved does not mean this woman did not feel violated.
The issue is that there are, unfortunately, too many doctors that take advantage of women's trust in them. Telling them they 'need' c/sections when they really don't.
I don't see the comparison between a necessary c/s (say, for a complete previa) and rape. However, if there's no good indication for it, she doesn't want one, and she still gets one, then technically that can be considered a violation of her body. Any other surgery performed on someone unnecessarily and against their will can be considered assault/battery. The thing is, it's hard to prove, especially when the doctor has documented things like 'CPD' or 'fetal distress' that may or may not have actually existed, that a section was done unecessarily (though most places keep monitor strips for the record as well). But I think anyone who has been in OB long enough can tell you that it happens.
There are docs who are also very keen on performing unnecessary hysterectomies. I went to an OB/GYN for pelvic floor issues related to my first child's birth (mid-forceps---yeowch!) and he tried to frighten me into an immediate hysterectomy. He pretty much told me that he wanted to schedule it for the very next week, giving me no time to think about it or talk it over with anyone. This jerk actually inferred that my uterus might fall out in the parking lot when I was walking to my car. I am sure someone without a health care background would have been pressured and frightened into agreeing to a hysterectomy. As an RN, I knew better. I got a second opinion at a different institution and avoided surgery at that time. NEVER went back to that butcher, either.
I am not sure I would go so far as to equate a repeat C-section with rape because sexual assault is the most intimate violation imaginable. However, it is still a violation and, while I don't quite agree with this woman's statement, I admire her for standing up for her rights and being a self-advocate. More women should follow her example, especially when it comes to OB/GYN care.
Here's a genius solution: Nurse midwife can help her give birth at home OR she can take her saggy butt to a different hospital instead of acting like a spoiled brat screaming for a toy.
Excuse me, but I find this statement to be rather offensive. I certainly expect more maturity from someone who is aspiring to a career in health care than to make judgmental statements about how a patient can "drag her saggy butt" to a different institution or calling her a "spoiled brat" because is advocating for herself. Nurses are expected to advocate for their patients and advocacy demands respect. Call me old school but I think statements like that do not demonstrate much empathy or respect for others.
I was seventeen when I started as a nursing assistant and I learned very quickly to treat my patients with the same kind of respect with which I would like to be treated.
I am not sure I would go so far as to equate a repeat C-section with rape because sexual assault is the most intimate violation imaginable.
The use of the word rape is certainly grabs our attention but let's not forget that sexual assault is not it's only meaning. Merriam Webster's definition of rape as a transitive verb: 1 aarchaic: to seize and take away by force b: despoil (to strip of belongings, possessions, or value) 2: to commit rape on.
She certainly has a right to plan for a VBAC at a facility and with a provider willing to abide by her wishes. If an insurance carrier tells a doctor and facility that they are not covered, what are they to do? They can't just be a nice guy or lady, cross their fingers and toes, hope for the best, and go with her wishes! Don't trash providers for this decision, this is all about liability. Our docs are pretty comfortable with VBAC, but our hopspital is not. So no more VBAC's. If the docs ignore the rule, no more ob. Then even more people suffer. Those who really want VBAC can travel twenty miles south or east. If they are in early labor, they may be transferred to a hospital of their choice. If they present to us in advanced labor, the OR team must sit there and wait until they deliver. This is not cost effective. We can't do it all of the time. I wish we offerred more options, but we must do what seems the least of all evils for our patients. I know of another facilty about 30 miles away who do VBAC's and also do not have 24 hour coverage for OR and anesthesia. Personally, I am not comfortable with that set up either, but they made that decision for themselves. Some places don't do water births. If you want one, you must go to a facility which offers it. We all have our limits. The spectrum of care is often limited by provider or circumstance. this is a fact of life. No one offers an unlimited menu of choices which will please everyone. remeber when insurance companies were making moms with prior c.sections labor against their wishes? No one liked that either.
Specializes in ER and family advanced nursing practice.
she is calling attention to the fact that her rights as a patient, as a mother, as a human, are being taken away. all over silly hospital policy? it makes absolutely no sense.
how are her rights being taken away? i mean, odds are it’s a privately held hospital (and even if its not) they can set their own policy as long as it doesn't violate state and federal hospital regulations. they have only been upfront about their policy (silly or not...that to me is not the point). no one's rights have been violated.
this woman was forced to have something done to her body against her wishes. i have heard of woman that refuse c-sections and then are forced by court order to get one. what other medical procedure is forced upon a patient? just because a member and lady parts was not involved does not mean this woman did not feel violated.
respectfully, that is incorrect since as of october 5th she has not delivered. ergo, she has not been forced to do anything except, perhaps, to reevaluate where she wants to deliver. in terms of medical procedures that are compulsory there are several. we prosecute parents for not seeking proper medical treatment (at least what is considered proper medical treatment). additionally, there are treatments that are mandated for certain mental health patients. i recognize that there is an international debate about this, but for now some of these policies are in place.
She is a legal risk ready to happen. If I were the MDs, I would refer her elsewhere for care. If she cannot see the reason behind a c-section for this, then she will most likely be a litigious hard-to-please patient, the likes of whom will most likely look for minute things to complain about and argue about, just to get her way. What a way to bring a new life into this world!
Many OBs are limited in doing VBACs because of the standard of care that says there must be an OB *in house* during the ENTIRE labor process for that patient, in the event of an emergency. Obviously, for someone in private practice, who has an off-site office, that can be prohibitive. Unless that patient wants to pay the going rate for having an OB at the bedside during the entire labor, she needs to get a grip, face reality, or find another provider who can offer her the care that she desires.
She is calling attention to the fact that her rights as a patient, as a mother, as a human, are being taken away. All over silly hospital policy? It makes absolutely no sense..thumb.gif.5406a59d44f5c666e8ff3ebac639497a.gif){kind=avatar}
ivanh3
472 Posts
I can understand the sentiment of a person wanting control over what happens to their body (and the body of their unborn child). One thing the article does not give though is background information on the hospital. If it truly is the only hospital around, their resources could very well be limited. There is data out there that suggests that hospitals that perform certain procedures more often usually have better outcomes in regards to those procedures. So the hospital's claim that they don't feel equipped to do emergent c-sections could be legit.
I don't know about the rape connection. As a former police officer, paramedic, and ER RN, I have worked with many rape victims. In my head I just can't seem to make the comparison work, but I guess I understand that others might. What does stick out to me is the notion that the patient (who in reality is a consumer) thinks she can control hospital policy. The hospital has said up front what its policy is. That is part of informed consent. She knows what her options are. My opinion here is that she should make other arrangements. I do acknowledge that might be easier said than done if resources are limited in terms of finance or geography.
Ivan