Regardless of how reprehensible the woman's attitude might be, to charge her with murder is beyond belief.
Next we'll be forced to allow our lives to be prolonged by machines unless we want to be charged with suicide/homicide.
The extent to which the government controls our lives is becoming more and more frightening to this sixty year old woman.
SCoates wrote:Well, the woman was not mentally well. Sometimes others need to make decisions for those who are not qualified to do so themselves.
Had the woman been shown to be mentally incompetent and unable to sign the legally-required consent form for the surgicial procedure, a Guardian should have been appointed for her, by the Court.
Miller wrote:Had the woman been shown to be mentally incompetent and unable to sign the legally-required consent form for the surgicial procedure, a Guardian should have been appointed for her, by the Court.
Someone would have had to petition the court for guardianship. How could the doctors wait for an emergency court hearing when she's in labor?
Camille wrote:Miller wrote:Had the woman been shown to be mentally incompetent and unable to sign the legally-required consent form for the surgicial procedure, a Guardian should have been appointed for her, by the Court.
Someone would have had to petition the court for guardianship. How could the doctors wait for an emergency court hearing when she's in labor?
For some women, labor can proceed for many days.
Could also add, the MDs should have immediately consulted the legal counsel for the hospital, when difficulties began to ensue.
OMG! I can't believe this subject is even called a criminal act by this woman. IF she were not mentally competent, why didn't family come forward and legally take her from any liability of the mentally ill? Apparently, no one saw this woman as incompetent until her legal right to choose what is done to her own body.
Can a doctor do anything at this point of emergency? No, they cannot. There is no time to consult with family and lawyers during the few hours of labor to call this woman legally incompetent to make her own decisions about her health care. Medical professionals are never allowed to go against request of the patient or will suffer legal consequence. The doctor had absolutely no choice at all but to abide by this woman's choice.
I have two kids. I even asked for someone to kill me in labor with my daughter. Pain and fear have control of your psychology at extremes. I did mean it at the time, but it is illegal to kill me on request of my pain and abnormal psychology under extreme circumstance. So, I lived and now have a 13 year old daughter only because no one killed me, as I asked. I repeatedly said I would rather be dead than suffer like this.
Women in labor suffer intense pain. My request of death was much more severe than this woman's of preference to natural birth, no matter what her reasoning.
There is often no reasoning with people in intense pain, as with me who requested death. No telling what else I might have popped out with, that is the extent of pain I was in. I was not myself. I was in pain which I have never known to exist. I still remember the horror on my husbands face by asking for death. He knew this wasn't me. He knew that I was reacting to something I psychologically could not handle.
I feel it is a woman's choice to give birth in a natural way. Surgical procedures were never nature until a late date. I'm sure the mother did spout out with all kind of irrational remarks, but held to giving a natural birth to her children. From a mother, I can tell you that surgery would have been much easier for her.
Has it ever crossed anyone's mind that this may be a personal belief, not some illogical, random statements of pain and fear by this woman? If she were psychologically inept, she should have been noticed way beyond giving birth. This is a matter of law. You have to prove another psychologically unable to make decisions in a court of law before ever taking individual rights from another.
What would have been easier for this woman in labor and pain? As a parent of two children, I have to say surgical means. They put you under and the pain stops. You wake up and have a child. This woman took intense pain and refused to the end deciding upon nature. I cannot fault her, although I may have not made the same decision. This woman did the hard road, not the easy one!
At age 18 or so everyone should be required to take a test to see whether they are legally competent. It would be nice if we could just label everyone off the bat.
Ouch! I think that idea gets a little sticky! Very few of us are not legally competent. I would hate to have a social popularity contest to decide upon my sanity! I don't agree at all with many social norms. That could make me legally incompetent, and you as well.
How many rights are we willing to give up? Are we really going to give people the right to choose invasive surgical procedures of their body by force? This is so wrong!
Nonconformity never made anyone incompetent. There are neurotic people, which many people are. There are psychotic people also. Neurosis does not make you incompetent in any way. Only a serious psychotic disorder does.
I feel it is entirely possible she rejects any type of surgical procedure out of neurotic fear, not any psychosis at all. She obviously flipped out on the idea of scars, but this may not be vanity at all. I have not been presented with any with clear, convincing evidence that she really is psychotic. Psychotic people do not understand reality from things they imagine.
If this woman is clearly psychotic, she is not capable of reasonable judgment at differing time, but capable of reason at others. Who is a mind reader predicting the psychotic and their thoughts? I also question sound mind of any woman in labor. I sure wasn't!
Neurotic people are very different. They do understand reality. Medically speaking, it is law that you cannot perform any procedure without a patient's consent, which the doctors did not have to perform a surgical birth. She was within the law and her rights to choose this.
The law must have a grand contradiction if you are allowed medical choices of your own body, but later be called a murder stating that you did not have the right to make this decision. The law is clear on one thing, doctors cannot do anything to your body without your consent, signed and documented.
This woman was clearly within her rights at the time of birth. Now she is a murderer for not making a socially popular choice?
Either allow us free choice to make medical decisions when it comes to our own body or make a law that allows a doctor to make choices for us. If you want to call this woman a murder, you have just give up the right to make any medical decision about your own body and invasive surgical procedure as well as you would like to take from her. Like that? I don't!
