Quote:
|
Originally Posted by orangebird
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bex
i'm not disputing that they were not wrong to let it happen. but i think to a certain degree the hands of the medical profession are tied. i read an article on a women who insisted on having a home birth but the baby was breach. midwives weren't legally allowed to do anything, otherwise they would be charged, but they had to stand and watch, luckily the women came to her senses. but it illustrates that maybe the laws are too rigid
|
But i'd break the law to save a baby's life....I can't believe there are people out there who wouldn't... |
I think she came to her senses a little too late and the baby died? She then discovered she was having twins (what no ultrasound or heart beat monitor spotted this?) and the second baby was delivered by c section as she was exhausted from being in labour for over 24 hours at that point.
This discussion formum indicates that too.
Re: breaking the law to save the babys life, its a bit difficult when you also have the father there who was also insistent that intervention would not occur, in line with his wifes wishes.
You also have the huge liability problem that if a disabled baby survives and the hospitaly you are attached to is sued, then you are on your own for your intervention, not insurance anything. Fancy losing your house to pay for the 24hr care of a baby the mother was to dumb to go to hospital to have delivered. While hospitals and horizontal delivery are sub optimal, the ability to intervene if problems arise makes home birth crazy IMHO.