Woman Loses Custody of Child For Cesarean Refusal

According to the original appeal hearing, when VM went into labour medical professionals at the hospital said she 'demonstrated combative and erratic behaviour including a refusal to consent to a Caesarean section.

'Despite the medical opinion that the foetus demonstrated signs of distress and that the procedure was necessary to avoid imminent danger to the foetus, the child was born by vaginal delivery without incident.'

something strange with all this, something not being said.

In fact, at one point V.M. did call the Livingston Police to report that she was being abused and denied treatment. She told a nurse that "no one is going to touch my baby." She continuously refused to wear the face mask that provided her with oxygen and also refused to remain still in order to allow for fetal heart monitoring. She thrashed about to the extent that it was unsafe for the anesthesiologist to administer an epidural. She would not allow Dr. Mansuria to touch the baby or perform an ultrasound examination.

If abortion is legal, then certainly a woman must have the right to refuse any treatment during the birthing process.

Throughout this entire period, V.M. "was very boisterous and yelling and screaming at the top of her lungs." B.G. was present while all of these events occurred. Dr. Mansuria explained the complications, such as brain damage, mental retardation and fetal death, that could occur if the fetus went into distress and a c-section was not performed. She also explained that an examination revealed a "nonreassuring fetal status."

Many women are very boisterous, yell and scream during birth, but no one takes their babies away.

B.G. said that he understood the risks, but V.M. would not consent to the procedure. The hospital responded appropriately to confront V.M.'s mental state and her refusal to consent to the c-section. After considering V.M.'s "extreme behavior" and signs of developing fetal distress, the hospital staff requested an emergency psychiatric evaluation to determine V.M.'s competency.

Screaming and yelling during birth and refusing treatment that you have the right to refuse means that you are mentally ill?

Dr. Devendra Kurani responded to the delivery room and spoke to V.M. for approximately one hour. While Dr. Kurani was there, the anesthesiologist was able to administer an epidural. V.M. informed Dr. Kurani that she had a psychiatric history and had been on medication prior to getting pregnant. B.G. confirmed that V.M. had been treated by a psychiatrist for post-traumatic stress disorder and had been prescribed Zoloft, Prozac and Seroquel.

V.M. is cooperative and compliant with Dr. Kurani, but this fact is ignored.

When Dr. Mansuria stressed the need for V.M. to consent to a c-section, V.M. stated that she understood the risks, but she did not want the procedure. Dr. Kurani then made a critical finding. Although he acknowledged that V.M. was very anxious, Dr. Kurani concluded that V.M. was not psychotic and had the capacity for informed consent with regard to the csection. At no time did anyone seek judicial intervention or the appointment of a special medical guardian.

Dr. Kurani says that V.M. was very anxious but not crazy.

After Dr. Kurani left, the staff requested a second psychiatric opinion from Dr. Jacob Jacoby. Before Dr. Jacoby's evaluation was completed, V.M. gave birth vaginally to J.M.G. without incident. In his report, Dr. Jacoby recounted V.M.'s professed history of childhood abuse, workplace violence and societal discrimination. He noted that V.M. was treated by a psychiatrist, Dr. Ronnie Lee Seltzer, for many years until V.M. stopped seeing her allegedly at the behest of her lawyers.

When officialdom doesn't get the diagnosis they want, they ask for a second opinion. Here we have the first hint of racial and possibly cultural issues. V.M. makes a mistake by confiding her psychiatric history to both doctors, probably thinking it will help. Your psychiatric history will always be used against you in child custody proceedings, regardless of how mild or serious your conditon is and regardless of how long ago it was.

Although he concluded that V.M. appeared to be cognitively intact, he admitted that "there is a gnawing concern overall that the patient may not be as intact as I may have described." Later that day, Dr. Jacoby dictated an addendum report recounting a conversation with Dr. Seltzer. Dr. Seltzer related that she initially treated V.M. for post-traumatic stress disorder but later began to appreciate that V.M. suffered from either a schizoaffective disorder or a bipolar disorder.