Cas, Julie and all, yes, here's a gasp and crossed fingers that.... all will go well.
Well said Julie. I have also been very disurbed by this situation of women planning care for themselves in diametrically opposed systems. I too have spoken of high rates of intervention, ways of intimidation. As a doula/birth attendant I have found that if a woman has a private obstetrician they tend to capitulate to whatever the obs is recommending - despite previously asking for and - at the birth time - getting advocacy re intervention from me in terms of asking for explanations, clarifications and evidence and 'why is it necessary'. Last couple of births I attended where women wanted 'as natural a birth as possible' but also wanted the obstetrician 'just in case' ended with a forceps pull out and Big PPH and a caesarean with rupuring wound infection on day 10. Good luck Cas... but it's never too late to change your choices. Why do you want private care? ( one of these women realised she wasn't so sure about her choice but decided to leave it to do differently next time. And I'm sure she will!! ) Have also just read an old book ( early 90's - picked up at a garage sale by a friend) by Kay Stammers, a TV media personality, about her pregnancy and birth. It was the most sad thing I've read in ages: Her distrust of her body all through pregnancy, her reliance on the expert to tell her about everything. At the same time as she supposedly embraced natural birth and did lots of book and class education. Wanted to change obstetricians at 6 months but didn't because obs didn't like the idea and so Kay felt too guilty to do so. Inevitable ending - older Mum, private private - emergency caesar with Kay saying the inevitable line 'doesn't matter how... healthy baby .... ' Margie At Fri, 13 Dec 2002 15:33:46 +1100, Julie Clarke ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > This is a very interesting discussion around rights and rites. > Caroline I am wondering why a normal healthy pregnant woman who > apparently wants a natural birth would choose a doctor and a > private > hospital, when those choices imply a medical birth in a place that > has > exceptionally high unnecessary medical intervention rates? Some > logic is > missing here. > As an educator I often find that normal healthy women "low risk" > if you > like book into private hospitals with a very strong desire to have > a > natural birth. > In some cases I noticed them with even more commitment than some > birth > centre women. Isn't that ironic! > My heart sinks as they continue the fantasy that they may have a > natural > birth and if baths are available the fantasy of even a waterbirth. > I explain and reveal the dept of health statistics which clearly > show > the current levels of medical intervention. > But like lambs to their slaughter some of these women remain with > the > flock that goes to the private system. > Occasionally when I have spoken to staff in private hospitals they > just > shrug it off saying that when women choose their doctor and their > hospital there is an IMPLICATION that they are CONSENTING to > whatever > medical treatment occurs. > I think it's important for everyone to pull their weight towards > "informing" women and not maintaining the conspiracy that medical > birth > is normal and okay. > We are cheating our sisters in motherhood whilst ever we support > doctors > and the big business of the private health sector. > What warms my heart is that I do hear of it everyday, where women > are > being WARNED by others "Stay Out of the Private System". > Julie Clarke > Childbirth and Parenting Educator > Transition into Parenthood > 9 Withybrook Pl > Sylvania NSW 2224 > T. (02) 9544 6441 > F (02) 9544 9257 > M. 0401 265 530 > email [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Wayne > and > Caroline McCullough > Sent: Thursday, 12 December 2002 11:03 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [ozmidwifery] Re: mothers rights in public hospital > > I am new to this group as of today but wanted to comment on this > thread. > My second baby is due in April, I am VBAC and we are going to a > private > hospital in Brisbane (I can hear the gasps already : ) ). Anyway, > I am > wondering if private "patients" can be refused treatment if they > do not > consent to monitoring or IV lines. After all, what are they going > to do, > throw a pregnant woman out on the street? I am taking a private > traditional midwife with me to the hospital to provide birth > support and > advocate on my behalf (the hospital is aware of this and has so > far been > supportive) so hopefully this will make refusal much easier. I am > not > entirely sure I can talk my doctor around before the birth, but > will try > anyway. He seems pretty reasonable overall (for an obgyn anyway). > He's > even agreed to deliver breech (probably the only doc in Brisbane > who > still does breech deliveries, although not all that often anymore > because most women assume breech means cut). > > Please let me know if anyone has any thoughts on this. > > Cheers, > > Cas McCullough > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Robyn > Thompson > Sent: Thursday, 12 December 2002 7:58 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [ozmidwifery] Re: mothers rights in public hospital > This is an interesting topic and really good educational programme > about > rights and responsibilities would be good. > > The word Policy is often used in the hospital system as a means to > take > control of women and make the staff feel safe from possible > litigation. > > A Policy is not a legally binding document, it is a blanket > statement > for the population, written to protect the hospital and the staff. > The > women who are forced to conform to such Policies have not had any > hand > in writing such documentation, their individual needs are negated. > > Everyone has the right to say NO, nothing should ever be done to > anyone > without informed consent. If we could just make all women feel > confident to use this approach when they get into a situation > where they > say and mean NO we would be empowering these women to make informed > decisions. The trouble is, it's quite scary when they feel > vulnerable in > the hospital system with all the "experts" hovering. > > Routine Fetal monitoring is a prime example. Compliance to 20 > minutes > of fetal monitoring on arrival is the expected norm here and is > hospital > Policy. In reality fetal monitoring does not have to be done at > any > time if the mother says NO. > * Regular auscultation with her consent and understanding > of the > progress of labour is be more valuable. > * Routine 4 hourly vaginal examination is another where > women > should say NO. > * Giving a baby formula without written and informed > consent is > yet another and so on and so on > Just my comments, Robyn > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Debby M > Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 11:44 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [ozmidwifery] Re: mothers rights in public hospital > Jill, when I was trying to get into the Birth Centre at RWH I > raised > just this question. The NSW Womens Service actually publish a book > on > the rights of pregnant mothers - I gave my copy away after my baby > was > born and can't remember what it was called but I am sure they would > know. > In addition I found out from one of the doctors at the hospital > that > regardless of what was hospital policy they could not force me to > comply > with their policies ie. the policy for VBACs is they are > continuously > monitored and have a drip in however if I did not consent to this > (which > I didn't) they could not force this upon me. If I went against a > policy > that required positive action on my part for example got in a bath > to > labour when policy said I couldn't they also could not forceably > r*move > me as this would constitute assault. However what they could do is > refuse to treat me - however this then raises issues related to > duty of > care in their facility - and from my discussions with the lawyer > at the > Women's legal service - perceived uncooperative behaviour on my > part > does not negate them from this duty of care - if a bad outcome had > occurred as a result of my decisions then there would be a case for > contributory negligence on my part which would lessen their > responsibility! ! but it would not negate it altogether. > The hospital itself also informed me that they cannot refuse to > treat > patients who come to them for care as this care under the public > system > is the primary right of every Australian. The "service" they > provide > must be with the patients informed consent. > Therefore the mother does have the right to refuse any > intervention from > VE's to caesareans. Her choice to do this may result in > contributory > negligence if she brings a case against the hospital for an adverse > outcome and if the hospital can PROVE that the failure to perform > the > said intervention contributed to the outcome. The onus of proof in > civil > cases is on the defence not the plaintiff - unlike criminal cases. > In addition there have been at least two cases in Australia where > children have bought cases against their parents for injury > suffered in > utero - I am not familiar with the cases though so am not sure if > these > were birth choices related or if they were related to acti*ns > taken by > the mother in pregnancy (eg. drugs). > This site has some discussion on this from midwives: > <http://casino.cchs.usyd.edu.au/bio/ats/news7body.htm#LAW3> > http://casino.cchs.usyd.edu.au/bio/ats/news7body.htm#LAW3 > " If there is any risk involved in the birth there is an > obligation to > inform the patient. However the carer cannot proceed with the > procedure > without the patient's consent. Without this the carer could be > accused > of assault." > In addition on the Birthrites website > <http://birthrites.edsite.com.au/> http://birthrites.edsite.com.au/ > under the subheading Hospital Policy - there is a quote from the > Commission into Foetal Welfare and the Law from the Australian > Supreme > Court which states: > "...When a competent, properly advised pregnant woman has clearly > communicated her decision to decline a particular form of > treatment, > there are no circumstances in which the law should seek to > override this > decision. The principle that her wishes should be respected should > prevail regardless of the degree of risk either to herself or the > foetus..." > It should be noted there have been cases in the US where the > welfare of > the baby has been placed over the desires of the mother and the > mother > has been either forceably admitted to hospital or give a caesarean > without her consent - but the lawyer I spoke to said that she was > not > aware of this ever occurring in Australia and felt that our human > rights > laws would negate such a thing being allowed unless it was deemed > that > the mother was not of sound mind to make decisions - which is > apparently > hard to prove. > The other interesting thing the Women's Legal Service advised me > is that > in the case of Birth Centres/Midwifery models a woman (or group > of) may > have a case for discrimination against a hospital where they are > refused > access to a particular Birth Centre/hospital on the basis of a > preexisting medical condition eg. age, VBAC etc - where other > Australian > Birth Centres/Midwifery models do accept women in that particular > "risk" > group. Such a case would need to be either through HREOC or by > civil > avenues (which is expensive). > I hope this h*lps but I would highly recommend getting in contact > with > the Women's Legal Service I found them most helpful. > Debby > > > > _____ > > Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. > <http://g.msn.com/8HMQEN/2021> > Get 2 months FREE*. -- This mailing list is sponsored by ACE > Graphics. > Visit to subscribe or unsubscribe. -------------------------------------------------------- Looking for a free email account? Get one now at http://www.freemail.com.au/ --------------------------------------------------------
