Massage Therapists,Aurora,ILDoes Refusing a C-Section = Child Abuse?
By Amie Newman,Managing Editor
August 13,2010 –7:00am
The National Association for Pregnant Women (NAPW) recently acknowledged a victory in which they played a part related to a woman who had given birth three years ago and had her newborn swiftly whisked away by a child protective authority claiming child endangerment for refusing to "pre-authorize"a cesarean section. The victory came in the form of a court decision last week reversing a lower court’s decision to terminate the mother’s parental rights (Ms.M aka V.M.) and remove the baby from her custody at birth,because she didn’t consent to a c-section,even though it was never medically necessary. According to NAPW staff attorney Farah Diaz-Tello,the issue of whether refusal of a cesarean section can be fashioned as medical neglect of a child was essentially "put to bed"in an opinion by the Appellate Division last year. However,Judge Carchman,writing in this recent decision confirms that the refusal to consent to a c-section has "no place"in the proceedings,stating that the term "child/ren"does not extend to fetuses for the purposes of the abuse/neglect statute under which Ms. M’s parental rights were terminated.
Please make sure to read this whole article by clicking the title. This is a horrific story that highlights why as women and families we need to be vigilant in educating ourselves about birth and make informed choices about how and especially where we birth. We can not muster along with our heads in the sand and assume the best of those around us during our birth. Remember,birth is a big business – look at the rates of Cesarean Section alone – 50% at St.Barnabus in NJ – astronomical. Pre-authorized consent forms? Ludicrous. As with any other business – buyer be ware. Know your provider,know your setting – don’t settle for anything less than what you want,this is your baby for goodness sakes.
