Sojourner Posted June 16, 2006 Author Share Posted June 16, 2006 [quote name='Socrates' post='1006542' date='Jun 15 2006, 08:38 PM'] The original lawsuit against the midwife . . . ok I see that is not really the point of this thread - my bad. Ignore my last post. [/quote] You mean the criminal charges against the midwife? There was no civil case filed against her. Hence my confusion. The parents did not sue her. Sorry if that was unclear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homeschoolmom Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 It wasn't that it was unclear, but as I was reading, I was preparing in my mind for a civil lawsuit, too. So, I suppose if one quickly scanned the story that would be the impression. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sojourner Posted June 16, 2006 Author Share Posted June 16, 2006 Yeah, from what I understand (although I haven't talked with them) the parents were, of course, heartbroken but did not blame Jennifer for the baby's death. She's not accused of any sort of malpractice ... just of breaking the law with regard to the practice of midwifery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homeschoolmom Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 They shouldn't be mad at her. I assume they knew of her training. However, people tend to get funny when they've lost a child. It would not have surprised me if they did, in fact, file a lawsuit against her. I'm glad they didn't, but it wouldn't have been surprised. Did they ever figure out what was the cause of death? Babies sometimes die under the care of a doctor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sojourner Posted June 16, 2006 Author Share Posted June 16, 2006 The child died as a result of pooled blood in the head and asphyxia. I don't have any details other than that ... but I do know negligence wasn't one of the factors in the charges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homeschoolmom Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 Ah.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avemaria40 Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 I want to be a midwife when I'm older and I've heard so much about defensive medicine (ie, c-sections done to protect the doctor, not the mother) that I'm kind of nervous about what things will be like when I go to work, or when I'm having my own babies. I am also nervous about the possiblity of being held responsible if I become a midwife and a child dies under my care. Practicing medicine of any kind, but especially when it comes to delivering babies has definetely become a lot more nervewracking w/lawsuits and criminal charges lurking everywhere [quote name='Birgitta Noel' post='1006403' date='Jun 15 2006, 03:36 PM'] You'd think. But in many (and I mean MANY) hopitals if a woman has had a C-Section she is not allowed, yes you read that right NOT ALLOWED , to give birth vaginally in subsequent pregnancies. Hospitals cite liability and risk. The medical literature is unsupportive at best and inconclusive at worst. I've done the research, am speaking on it in Oct in fact, and there are a number of reasons why this is unethical, etc. The point is this, childbirth has become highly medicalized. Women often loose a lot of control in the process. Much of hospital birth is geared towards the convenience of the physician, or to minimize lawsuits, not toward the woman giving birth. [/quote] This stuff makes me livid! I have studied pregnancy and breastfeeding, etc. in honors bio as a sophomore and on my own, since I want to be a midwife and I am so sick of everything being medicalized (unless it is a high risk pregnancy of course. But natural usually is better for mother and child under low risk pregnancies) to protect doctors and to insure they get paid more money (a six figure salary isn't enough?) However, usually a woman is allowed to give birth naturally after a c-section, if the c-section cut is a horizontal cut near the bikini line or something like that. It's when the cut is vertical in the upper abdomen that makes it difficult to have a vaginal birth b/c of the possiblity of uterine damage. I'm sick of women not having a choice! They tell us to use birth control and have abortions (treating our fertility and our children like curses) but when it comes to things like natural birth, breastfeeding, etc. they don't want to tell us anything! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birgitta Noel Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 (edited) [quote name='avemaria40' post='1009823' date='Jun 21 2006, 11:28 AM'] However, usually a woman is allowed to give birth naturally after a c-section, if the c-section cut is a horizontal cut near the bikini line or something like that. It's when the cut is vertical in the upper abdomen that makes it difficult to have a vaginal birth b/c of the possiblity of uterine damage. [/quote] This actually is not true. The vertical incision is rarely used anymore. Even when women have had the horizontal incision they are still not allowed to do VBAC and there are still VBAC bans in MANY hopsital systems. There was a one word change in the ACOG guidelines a few years back that led to many bans being enacted/reinstated. Other docs claim to allow VBAC, but do many things to ensure that the woman "consents" to a c-sect. Only 9.2% of women "eligible" for VBAC actually had one. The VBAC rate has dropped 67% in the last decade. Why? Liability and VBAC bans. [url="http://www.ican-online.org/press/articles/20051115-ican.pdf"]http://www.ican-online.org/press/articles/20051115-ican.pdf[/url] Edited June 21, 2006 by Birgitta Noel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birgitta Noel Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 [quote name='Birgitta Noel' post='1009857' date='Jun 21 2006, 12:46 PM'] This actually is not true. 1) The vertical incision is rarely used anymore. 2) It is true that the horizontal incision is now used, almost exclusively, and that there is about the same complication (or lower) rate for VBAC and repeat c-section. BUT, even when women have had the horizontal incision they are still not allowed to do VBAC and there are still VBAC bans in MANY hopsital systems. There was a one word change in the ACOG guidelines a few years back that led to many bans being enacted/reinstated. Other docs claim to allow VBAC, but do many things to ensure that the woman "consents" to a c-sect. Only 9.2% of women "eligible" for VBAC actually had one. The VBAC rate has dropped 67% in the last decade. Why? Liability and VBAC bans. [url="http://www.ican-online.org/press/articles/20051115-ican.pdf"]http://www.ican-online.org/press/articles/20051115-ican.pdf[/url] [/quote] NOTE: Edit to the above to make better sense! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichaelF Posted June 22, 2006 Share Posted June 22, 2006 Obstetricians are the Specialists hardest hit by the malpractice suit enivronment. Anythings wrong with the infant (often teratogenic or even congenital issues), the Obstetrician gets a suit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laudate_Dominum Posted June 22, 2006 Share Posted June 22, 2006 [quote name='MichaelF' post='1010247' date='Jun 21 2006, 11:10 PM'] Obstetricians are the Specialists hardest hit by the malpractice suit enivronment. Anythings wrong with the infant (often teratogenic or even congenital issues), the Obstetrician gets a suit. [/quote] I had to use a dictionary to fully comprehend your post. I wasn't 100% positive about the meaning of teratogenic. I hope I'm not the only one cuz I feel dumb right now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sojourner Posted June 22, 2006 Author Share Posted June 22, 2006 [quote name='MichaelF' post='1010247' date='Jun 22 2006, 01:10 AM'] Obstetricians are the Specialists hardest hit by the malpractice suit enivronment. Anythings wrong with the infant (often teratogenic or even congenital issues), the Obstetrician gets a suit. [/quote] This is true. I've read that more and more docs in family practice are refusing to deliver babies because malpractice insurance premiums are skyhigh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homeschoolmom Posted June 22, 2006 Share Posted June 22, 2006 Yeah... The doctor who delivered our babies is a family practice doc. I like having him see the kids for their check ups and stuff. But yeah, fewer and fewer are doing deliveries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichaelF Posted June 22, 2006 Share Posted June 22, 2006 (edited) Teratogenesis: (literally) [i]monster-making[/i]. Teratogenic defects occur when the developing fetus (which would otherwise be baseline/normal) is exposed to environmental factors* which cause the development of abnormal cell masses during fetal growth. This usually leads to gross morphological abnormalities or a stillborn offspring. Fetal Alcohol Syndrome is the most recognized expression, along with Thalidomide. This is often not detected with casual screenings, such as amniocentesis (as it is not genetic), if the abnormalities are not extreme. Ergo, there is no way that the Obstetrician attending could be responsible for the state of the child. Doesnt stop them from getting sued. *- [quote]Known Human Teratogenic Agents [b]Ionizing Radiation[/b] Atomic weapons Radioiodine Therapeutic [b]Infections[/b] Cytomegalovirus (CMV) Herpes virus hominis I and II Parvovirus B-19 (Erthema infectiosum) Rubella virus Syphilis Toxoplasmosis Venezuelan equine encephalitis virus [b]Metabolic Imbalance[/b] Alcoholism Endemic cretinism Diabetes Folic acid deficiency Hyperthermia Phenylketonuria Rheumatic disease and congenital heart block Virilizing tumors [b]Drugs and Environmental Chemicals[/b] 13-cis-retinoic acid (isotretinoin and Accutane) Aminopterin and methylaminopterin Androgenic hormones Busulfan Captopril; Enalapril and renal damage Chlorobiphenyls Cocaine Coumarin anticoagulantsCyclophosphamide Diethylstilbestrol Diphenylhydantoin and trimethadione Etretinate Lithium Methimazole and scalp defects Mercury organic Penicillamine Tetracyclines Thalidomide Trimethadione Valproic acid Reproduced with permission from Paul M. Occupational and Environmental Reproductive Hazards (1993). [/quote] Edited June 22, 2006 by MichaelF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now