Page 4 of 9 [ 136 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 9  Next

LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 49
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,402

31 May 2011, 3:31 pm

Natty_Boh wrote:
LKL, this situation may not be rare, but how often (if ever) is abortion the only solution? Obviously she could not carry to term. Obviously they were both going to die if nothing was done immediately. But was a C-section not an option? The article doesn't say either way, so the question remains - was it simply a situation of 'the baby is going to die anyway, so it doesn't matter'; or was her condition such that a C-section was out of the question - and if so, was it the hospital's fault for not acting sooner?

No, the baby wouldn't have survived the C-section. Not at 20 weeks. Or just maybe, he/she would have been the first to survive, just as some 22 week old baby was once the first...a chance was there anyways. But not with an abortion.

From the original article, quote:
Everyone knew the pregnancy wasn't viable, that it couldn't be viable given the amount of blood I was losing...



ValentineWiggin
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 May 2011
Age: 37
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,907
Location: Beneath my cat's paw

31 May 2011, 3:31 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
91 wrote:
dionysian wrote:
Such "conscientious objection" should occur prior to assuming a position where it is your responsibility to act in such situations. If you're a soldier, asked to provide covering fire for one of your buddies... that's not the time to object. You object before enlisting.


By your logic, I would not be justified in refusing an order to provide covering fire in an area where I disagree with the assessment made of the likelihood of civilian casualties... should I have objected to those circumstances at the point of enlistment?


People do realize that often they don't have to do an abortion, they could actually deliver the infant (which would probably survive with medical treatment) and still save the life of the mother.


The vast majority of medical procedures don't "have to" be done, that is, people would not die without them.

The tiny fraction of abortions which occur when the fetus would be "deliverable", that is, in the third trimester, are to save the woman's life due to a late-occurring or late-discovered death or horrible deformity of the fetus.


_________________
"Such is the Frailty
of the human Heart, that very few Men, who have no Property, have any Judgment of their own.
They talk and vote as they are directed by Some Man of Property, who has attached their Minds
to his Interest."


Natty_Boh
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Dec 2010
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 756
Location: Baltimore County

31 May 2011, 3:36 pm

LKL wrote:
Natty_Boh wrote:
LKL, this situation may not be rare, but how often (if ever) is abortion the only solution? Obviously she could not carry to term. Obviously they were both going to die if nothing was done immediately. But was a C-section not an option? The article doesn't say either way, so the question remains - was it simply a situation of 'the baby is going to die anyway, so it doesn't matter'; or was her condition such that a C-section was out of the question - and if so, was it the hospital's fault for not acting sooner?

No, the baby wouldn't have survived the C-section. Not at 20 weeks. Or just maybe, he/she would have been the first to survive, just as some 22 week old baby was once the first...a chance was there anyways. But not with an abortion.

From the original article, quote:
Everyone knew the pregnancy wasn't viable, that it couldn't be viable given the amount of blood I was losing...


The pregnancy - meaning the continued carrying of the child - or the actual child? The former is sometimes used to refer to the latter, so I don't know which is meant here.


_________________
For men are homesick in their homes,
And strangers under the sun,
And they lay their heads in a foreign land
Whenever the day is done."


LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 49
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,402

31 May 2011, 3:40 pm

@ Natty_Boh, I think it's pretty clear that she meant that the fetus was dead and/or dying.



leejosepho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,011
Location: 200 miles south of Little Rock

31 May 2011, 3:43 pm

Natty_Boh wrote:
From the original article, quote:
Quote:
Everyone knew the pregnancy wasn't viable, that it couldn't be viable given the amount of blood I was losing...

The pregnancy - meaning the continued carrying of the child - or the actual child? The former is sometimes used to refer to the latter, so I don't know which is meant here.

I would check the word "everybody" there since I believe it meant everyone prior to the hospital visit and not necessarily that everyone there at the hospital well-understood the entire history and/or overall situation ...

... and I also know what it is like to lay there while subject to a bunch of medical students all around ...

... and I once knew a woman who nearly bled to death in her bed at a nursing home until a visitor dialed 911.


_________________
I began looking for someone like me when I was five ...
My search ended at 59 ... right here on WrongPlanet.
==================================


Last edited by leejosepho on 31 May 2011, 3:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.

psychohist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,623
Location: Somerville, MA, USA

31 May 2011, 3:46 pm

LKL wrote:
So,basically, you think that she's lying.

I'm reading the factual statements and subtracting out the potentially misleading emotional wording.

Quote:
Second, the husband gave permission after she was too out-of-it from blood loss to respond because she was incapable of consent, not because she wouldn't consent.

Which proves my point: she hadn't consented. Her story implies that she was capable of consent when she arrived at the hospital and for some time thereafter, and she hadn't given consent during that time. Unless you think the blood loss happened before she got to the hospital, which I suppose is also possible.

Quote:
Note also that the doctor present didn't say that he could not do an abortion, but that he did not ever do abortions.

Actually, we have no idea what that doctor said. It's the author of the article who used that wording, not the doctor.

Most abortions are early and are relatively simple procedures. No doctor who has never done an abortion is qualified to handle a difficult, later term abortion.



Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

31 May 2011, 3:59 pm

psychohist wrote:
LKL wrote:
Second, the husband gave permission after she was too out-of-it from blood loss to respond because she was incapable of consent, not because she wouldn't consent.

Which proves my point: she hadn't consented. Her story implies that she was capable of consent when she arrived at the hospital and for some time thereafter, and she hadn't given consent during that time. Unless you think the blood loss happened before she got to the hospital, which I suppose is also possible.

Read more carefully. She went into surgery after waiting around at the hospital for some time because they either could not or would not bring in a physician who was qualified to treat her. By the time that physician arrived, she was already in very bad shape. It was not a matter of refusing to consent earlier, but of not having the opportunity to do so.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


leejosepho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,011
Location: 200 miles south of Little Rock

31 May 2011, 4:10 pm

Orwell wrote:
... because they either could not or would not bring in a physician who was qualified ...

Or, maybe they could have and would have if someone had not dropped the ball somewhere along the way.

I have been in hospital and ER situations where that old "nobody did because everybody knew anybody could and was sure somebody (eventually) would" was going on.


_________________
I began looking for someone like me when I was five ...
My search ended at 59 ... right here on WrongPlanet.
==================================


Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

31 May 2011, 4:12 pm

leejosepho wrote:
Orwell wrote:
... because they either could not or would not bring in a physician who was qualified ...

Or, maybe they could have and would have if someone had not dropped the ball somewhere along the way.

I have been in hospital and ER situations where that old "nobody did because everybody knew anybody could and was sure somebody (eventually) would" was going on.

Possibly. That would fall under "could not" in my comment- that is, they were not able to respond to the situation in a way that ensured proper care was being provided in a timely fashion.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 49
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,402

31 May 2011, 4:14 pm

I don't know what it's like at other hospitals, but I know that at mine the doctors are generally champing at the bit to get a patient moved and under another doctor's care once the decision has been made about where they need to go. They are generally calling other docs, nagging the house sup., and basically asking, 'are we there yet,' about every 5 minutes. The 'ball' is not dropped, it is turned into a hot potato. It certainly doesn't lay there and bleed to death.



leejosepho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,011
Location: 200 miles south of Little Rock

31 May 2011, 4:19 pm

Orwell wrote:
leejosepho wrote:
Orwell wrote:
... because they either could not or would not bring in a physician who was qualified ...

Or, maybe they could have and would have if someone had not dropped the ball somewhere along the way.

I have been in hospital and ER situations where that old "nobody did because everybody knew anybody could and was sure somebody (eventually) would" was going on.

Possibly. That would fall under "could not" in my comment- that is, they were not able to respond to the situation in a way that ensured proper care was being provided in a timely fashion.

Yes, understood.


_________________
I began looking for someone like me when I was five ...
My search ended at 59 ... right here on WrongPlanet.
==================================


leejosepho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,011
Location: 200 miles south of Little Rock

31 May 2011, 4:25 pm

LKL wrote:
I don't know what it's like at other hospitals, but I know that at mine the doctors are generally champing at the bit to get a patient moved and under another doctor's care once the decision has been made about where they need to go. They are generally calling other docs, nagging the house sup., and basically asking, 'are we there yet,' about every 5 minutes. The 'ball' is not dropped, it is turned into a hot potato. It certainly doesn't lay there and bleed to death.

Your experience and mine were identical until about nine months ago when I found myself in a local-yokel hospital near my new home 900 miles away ...

... and then just 6 months ago, I watched helplessly as the staff of a prominent university teaching hospital pushed me around from one "team" to another and then tried to send me back home just as quickly as possible even though I was only temporarily stable via IVs in the ICU.


_________________
I began looking for someone like me when I was five ...
My search ended at 59 ... right here on WrongPlanet.
==================================


LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 49
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,402

31 May 2011, 4:29 pm

That type of behavior is just as bad in your case as it was in the case described in the initial article.



leejosepho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,011
Location: 200 miles south of Little Rock

31 May 2011, 4:34 pm

LKL wrote:
That type of behavior is just as bad in your case as it was in the case described in the initial article.

Not quite as life-threatening in the immediate sense, but yes ...

... and that is why we must all be cautious when someone might mis-use even his or her won story. For example:

My older daughter miscarried several times before her first live birth finally happened, but that does not prove anything about the midwife who had been attending her ...

... and yet, I bet you and I both just saw some heads tip a bit when I mentioned "midwife", eh?! :wink:


_________________
I began looking for someone like me when I was five ...
My search ended at 59 ... right here on WrongPlanet.
==================================


Natty_Boh
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Dec 2010
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 756
Location: Baltimore County

31 May 2011, 4:37 pm

LKL wrote:
@ Natty_Boh, I think it's pretty clear that she meant that the fetus was dead and/or dying.


If 'dead', then pro-choice/pro-life, abortion/no abortion, is a non-issue and her story is tangential to the point she goes on to make. If 'dying', then make every effort that gives the child a chance to live. Even if that's a vanishingly small chance, still offer it. In any case, the hospital staff failed horribly in their care of her, that's not in dispute.


_________________
For men are homesick in their homes,
And strangers under the sun,
And they lay their heads in a foreign land
Whenever the day is done."


LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 49
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,402

31 May 2011, 4:47 pm

leejosepho wrote:
LKL wrote:
That type of behavior is just as bad in your case as it was in the case described in the initial article.

Not quite as life-threatening in the immediate sense, but yes ...

... and that is why we must all be cautious when someone might mis-use even his or her won story. For example:

My older daughter miscarried several times before her first live birth finally happened, but that does not prove anything about the midwife who had been attending her ...

... and yet, I bet you and I both just saw some heads tip a bit when I mentioned "midwife", eh?! :wink:

No, why? there are a couple of CNMs at my hospital, and I would choose either of them over an Ob-Gyn if I were preparing for a normal delivery. I like their attitude better.

... or did you mean, 'semi-trained lay-midwife'?