eoe wrote:Is there a "father" in all of this?
I don't recall hearing about one.
From what I read, the woman left her husband and was living with/traveling with a boyfriend. At this point paternity of the twins is unclear.
Noddy24 wrote:The doctors were sure that the refusal to have a Caesarian would kill or damage the unborn twins.
They obviously were not sure as to whether unborn twins had rights under the "clear and present danger to herself or others" mantra.
Would that there had been a motherly (or fatherly), smooth-talking member of the medical staff who could have convinced this woman that the babys were more important than the scars.
There was not.
I have to assume that the Docs also knew that the mother could have died during the procedure.
Reminds me a little of the eugenics, where they would sterilize people without telling them about it. You just don't make people go through surgery if they don't want to.
Maybe she shouldn't have had those kids anyway... Didn't sound like her life was on track.
What gets me is a people are all in a fus over a baby dying of natural child birth. That's all it was. To refuse a C- section is not murder
You know what the problem really is? This woman made the mistake of going to an LDS Mormon hospital. They are freaks about that stuff. This hospital is the one that should be in legal trouble for putting this woman through this. I don't care if she is crazy. What she did has nothing to do with being crazy. All she did was chose natural child birth over a C- section.
If you ask me, it's just one less brat in the world using up our resources. You win some, you loose some. That's the way the worls goes round.
I know my words are harsh, but I'm pissed off today.
A Morman hospital? K... 'nuff said. Now I see why this has been taken so far.
L.R.R.Hood wrote:A Morman hospital? K... 'nuff said. Now I see why this has been taken so far.
Yes, LDS stands for Later Day Saints. (Mormons) and Utah is the church headquarters. That's why I don't like Utah, but then I don't like texas either. Oh boy, I just messed with Texas...
Not everybody who lives in a state agrees with the assumptions for which the state, or, the country for that matter, is famed.
ossobuco wrote:Not everybody who lives in a state agrees with the assumptions for which the state, or, the country for that matter, is famed.
I'm sorry ossobuco. I've been in a bad mood all day. But I never said I hated people from Utah, I just don't like the state. Let's just say it's the lowest on my list of states I want to vacation in. :wink:
When you say that you don't like the state, rover, is it the land, the terrain, or what exactly? It's just such a curious comment.
I thought that Mormons would have been on the side of forbidding a C-section instead of insisting on one. Aren't Mormons real strict about medicine and medical procedures?
It's the political climate that comes out of Utah that I don't like. It's heavy on church politics. They have the same climate in Boise too and I live here. I hate it here too :wink:
I just read in the news that there's a Utah man suing Janet Jackson over the faulty wardrobe controversy. Stories like this come out of Utah all the time. It's boring. There's more important things in the world to worry about than this stuff.
Also, I haven't noticed a lot of people from Utah on here defending their state...
An old friend taught in Utah for years. He was there because he liked the natural landscape, he was a mountain climber, chemist, very accomplished in English lit. I think he ended up being an english lit prof.
He was from a jewish family with a background in liberal/left of that politics and was the person who started me paying attention to these matters.
I live now in a county of rednecks (so called) and wild eyed liberals and many libertarians, and the place is described by various people as a hotbed of each.
I know Utah's population is rather homogenous, but the place isn't quite that same, as an equation, as the majority population.
I really don't mean to bash the people of Utah, just the state. I'm sure there are a lot of great people from Utah but as a state they pass some of the craziest laws and have some of the most church minded politicians in government. This makes for a lousy political environment when it's in the majority!
Don't get me wrong though, Utah and Idaho both have some beautiful country. Northern Idaho has some of the most scenic forrest land in the country but you sure wouldn't want to go up there if you're black.
My co-worker who is retired military from the Airforce base here in Idaho and happens to be black says that they warn all of the minority military personnel to stay away from Northern Idaho when they leave the base because they could just disappear.
Again, part of the political climate in Utah and Idaho. Two of the whitest most Mormon states in the union.
I don't feel bad about taking this thread off topic since nobody has replied to the original post since the 14th.
Nah, and I was nervous in Idaho myself, when I went up there for my 100 yr old aunt's funeral, as that is where she was raised and my cousins still have land there.
If I was a tad nervous, they might go crazy if I brought my niece. But never mind. That was my paranoia, I know it, based on generalities. Still, I did feel wary, like a bird on my shoulder, I admit it.
In the meantime, I was trying to figure out where my dad's family lived in Sonoma county around 1900, and a friend who is into geneology helped. I still haven't found the hop farm in Sonoma, but did find out that just before my dad was born the family lived in Idaho and my grandfather was, oh, no.....
no....... an attorney.
So, s/t, I have roots.
I live that Genealogy stuff. When I lived in Portland, where I was bourn I used to do Genealogy all the time. I had some major finds. It's pretty easy when you live in the area where your family has lived since 1860. All you have to do is go to the local library and look up your ancestors. I found old homesteads and the actual grave of my 3rd great grandfather. Genealogy can be exciting. But it's funner when you live where the documentation is. The internet is making that easier though.
My pal did some major hunting. I still have the results in this pile of paper... really, I only wanted to know where the hop farm was, and that is the one thing we can't ferret out because the county doesn't have the birth record, though I have the baptism cert a couple of days later. Oh, well.
She/I did find the old place in Sacramento... a pleasure, and I have knocked on the door and introduced myself and the son (oh, 30-something) was at least moderately interested and kindly to the odd knock on door and story from a middle aged woman. But I have failed to send him a picture of the old house since, m'fault, various things going on in my life. I will, I will.
Rover, I edited that earlier post a little, re idaho.
ossobuco wrote:She/I did find the old place in Sacramento... a pleasure, and I have knocked on the door and introduced myself and the son (oh, 30-something) was at least moderately interested and kindly to the odd knock on door and story from a middle aged woman. But I have failed to send him a picture of the old house since, m'fault, various things going on in my life. I will, I will.
Then I was in my early 20's I went through the phone book and called everyone with the last names that were in my Genealogy. Now that I think about it I sure wouldn't do it again... But I actually did find a relative. Some 3rd cousin twice removed who had the same 3rd great grandfather as me. He came over and we exchanged family charts. It was very interesting but I don't recommend calling everyone in the phone book. :wink:
