Jump to content
IGNORED

Miscarrying woman denied an abortion, dies (Ireland) MERGED


ceg045

Recommended Posts

Sadly this can happen here for women who go to Catholic hospitals for miscarriage management.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2636458/

This is why my mother told me to never go to a Catholic hospital for anything OBGYN related. They don't care what religious beliefs a patient has, everything is subject to Catholic moral teachings. If you have an ectopic, they do surgery rather than tube-sparing methotrexate treatment. If a termination is necessary to save the woman's life or health it has to go by an ethics panel of priests and nuns who presume to know better than the patient and her doctor what is best. I wouldn't even go to the hospital in town because it's affiliated with a large Catholic hospital and I don't know the extent to which they have to follow their affiliate's rules (among other reasons).

I have an OBGYN who has privileges at two hospitals, neither of which is affiliated in any way with the Catholic church (a university medical center and a large community hospital). One of the other doctors in the practice also works with Planned Parenthood, and they offer birth control and sterilization openly and freely. It's a comforting feeling to know that if the stuff ever hit the proverbial fan re: obstetric care, my doctor's focus would be preserving my life and fertility and he wouldn't be hampered by religious dogma that I don't personally subscribe to.

In a small city around 20-30 minutes from here, two hospitals are merging: one Catholic, one secular. The merged institution will have to follow the Catholic rules because the Catholic church will have a larger ownership stake (it's a situation where both have to merge to survive, but the Catholic hospital is in less dire financial straits). This will render a community of over 100,000 people, many of whom are uninsured or of lower socioeconomic status, with no local hospital that can provide an appropriate standard of gynecological and obstetric care. There will be no tubal ligations after a C-section, no methotrexate treatment for ectopic pregnancy, no termination to protect the health of the mother, no emergency contraception to rape victims presenting at the ER. It's disgusting and I don't understand why the state is allowing the merger to happen like this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 120
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I was thinking about this whole disturbing chain of events last night when I was pondering the paucity of news coverage of the event here in the US.

I would think that the antiabortion religionists would be encouraging coverage of this woman's death and suffering in order to show how well their antiabortion stance works.

>sarcasm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was thinking about this whole disturbing chain of events last night when I was pondering the paucity of news coverage of the event here in the US.

In spite of all the 24-hour news channels we have, the coverage of international news is pretty damn pathetic. It's cheaper to rehash the same old crap every hour, than to educate people with some news from and about other countries, I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thankfully, these days we have Facebook and Twitter and places like FJ.

Seriously, my friends are enough internet junkies that most news stories hit my FB a day or two before the newspaper/Yahoo/TV news. And you guys find things I'd never see otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or anything end-of-life related. A close friend's father was dying of leukemia. He was at home in the final stages of the disease, unconscious most of the time. He had a heart attack. My friend, who was one of his caretakers, panicked and called an ambulance, which transported him to the closest hospital. It was a Catholic facility. The hospital installed a *pacemaker* in a dying, 80-something-year-old man. His family was bewildered and furious that they'd performed the surgery. When his family demanded to know why this was done on him, they were informed that their guidelines didn't stipulate a pacemaker as a heroic, extraordinary measure. It was considered a lifesaving measure, and they therefore felt morally bound to install it in him. To give him a "natural death," dontchaknow.

Once they got him back home my friend consulted with his doctor, who advised the family that when his vitals went wonky again they were to inform the ambulance that they were to take him to the local non-Catholic, community hospital, where he'd be made comfortable and where they would most probably not take any intrusive measures to prolong his life.

This all happened ten or more years ago, and my friend still gets indignant talking about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was thinking about this whole disturbing chain of events last night when I was pondering the paucity of news coverage of the event here in the US.

I would think that the antiabortion religionists would be encouraging coverage of this woman's death and suffering in order to show how well their antiabortion stance works.

>sarcasm

Actually a lot of pro-life coverage is claiming she could have lived without an abortion, that this has nothing to do with choice, and that it's pro-choice people co-opting Savita and her story to "further our evil cause" or something. They honestly thing that there is no time EVER that an abortion can save a woman's life.

Either that, or lifers are remarkably silent on the subject. Pricks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually a lot of pro-life coverage is claiming she could have lived without an abortion, that this has nothing to do with choice, and that it's pro-choice people co-opting Savita and her story to "further our evil cause" or something. They honestly thing that there is no time EVER that an abortion can save a woman's life.

Either that, or lifers are remarkably silent on the subject. Pricks.

As far as I can see, the really stupid ones are running their mouths, and the ones who have enough common sense to understand what happened to Savita are remaining silent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually a lot of pro-life coverage is claiming she could have lived without an abortion, that this has nothing to do with choice, and that it's pro-choice people co-opting Savita and her story to "further our evil cause" or something. They honestly thing that there is no time EVER that an abortion can save a woman's life.

Either that, or lifers are remarkably silent on the subject. Pricks.

From that stalwart of balanced news coverage, Lifesite News:

"Indeed, one doctor in India has pointed out that abortion in such cases would probably have only hastened Savita’s death. Gynaecologist Hema Divakar, resident-elect of the Federation of Obstetric and Gynaecological Societies of India (FOGSI), has told The Hindu, “Based on information in the media, in that situation of septicaemia, if the doctors had meddled with the live baby, Savita would have died two days earlier.â€

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/the-wh ... h-children

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From that stalwart of balanced news coverage, Lifesite News:

"Indeed, one doctor in India has pointed out that abortion in such cases would probably have only hastened Savita’s death. Gynaecologist Hema Divakar, resident-elect of the Federation of Obstetric and Gynaecological Societies of India (FOGSI), has told The Hindu, “Based on information in the media, in that situation of septicaemia, if the doctors had meddled with the live baby, Savita would have died two days earlier.â€

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/the-wh ... h-children

Lifesitenews is American. I think the fact that they had to try another continent before they could find a doctor willing to say that says it all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Indeed, one doctor in India has pointed out that abortion in such cases would probably have only hastened Savita’s death. Gynaecologist Hema Divakar, resident-elect of the Federation of Obstetric and Gynaecological Societies of India (FOGSI), has told The Hindu, “Based on information in the media, in that situation of septicaemia, if the doctors had meddled with the live baby, Savita would have died two days earlier.â€

I'd totally be willing to render a medical opinion and be quoted internationally based on information reported by the media. We all know that they totally had her entire medical chart, lab tests, ultrasound reports etc and published enough information for an educated medical decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's going to be an inquiry with an independant international expert joining the panel. I will be keen to see the outcome. After all, nobody really knows the details yet. There is a big march planned for tomorrow afternoon to the Dail. I sense our prime minister (Taoiseach) is hoping it'll quietly go away but even today it's still the number one news item.

What fucked me off royally today was... I went to a funeral in a rural area (aunt of DH) and a bunch of kids did nice prayers of the faithful. Then, the arsehole priest jumped in and added one of his own, "we pray for sa sa sav......that Indian lady's family in their grief and we pray for doctors to continue to respect the precious gift of life" WANKER. Totally inappropriate. There was audible tut tutting in the church. He was rubbish anyway. Kept getting the dead woman's name wrong. I was really disgusted.

Re catholic hospitals. Ironically, the Catholic Church doesn't own any hospitals in Ireland. Oh wait... They just own the minister for health and most of parliament. Hmmmmmm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I don't understand what happened. Was there some element of medical malpractice as well - how come they couldn't prevent/treat the septicaemia in any other way? (I don't know much about this, so there might be a simple explanation, but it seemed a bit odd to me.)

From what I understand, it was having her cervix so dilated with the infected fetus in there that made her susceptible. They would have had to literally flood her with antibiotics to even have a chance at touching the infection without removing the fetus. Why they didn't try, I'm not sure, but I think either they were afraid it might fuck up her system and/or kill the fetus anyway.

Point blank, the quickest, easiest, and safest treatment was removal of the fetus. That would have prevented her cervix and uterus from being so open and vulnerable for so long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I understand, it was having her cervix so dilated with the infected fetus in there that made her susceptible. They would have had to literally flood her with antibiotics to even have a chance at touching the infection without removing the fetus. Why they didn't try, I'm not sure, but I think either they were afraid it might fuck up her system and/or kill the fetus anyway.

Point blank, the quickest, easiest, and safest treatment was removal of the fetus. That would have prevented her cervix and uterus from being so open and vulnerable for so long.

Oh, I think that makes sense - and they refused to induce why? That doesn't "kill the baby". Or did they try and that's why her cervix was open?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seconding the "never go to a Catholic hospital" proclamations. My cousin lost her first baby due to having an "incompetent cervix," and was admitted to a Catholic hospital when she went into premature labor - and she stayed in labor for three days with a baby that had already passed away because her water hadn't broken yet and it was against hospital policy to interfere with the "natural" order of things. Absolutely insane.

I feel so horrible for this poor woman and her husband - what a nightmare for him to have to go through. I hope, more than anything, that he can find some sort of peace someday. And that he also gets an enormous payout from the hospital. "Pro-life" my ass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, I think that makes sense - and they refused to induce why? That doesn't "kill the baby". Or did they try and that's why her cervix was open?

Induction would have killed the fetus as she was only 17 weeks along, which is two full months before the generally accepted "viability" period for any fetus. Her cervix was open because her body was trying to miscarry but could not finish the job itself. The baby was doomed either way, but because this hospital stuck to the letter of the law, they took the mother along with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is why I've gone from "well, I feel a little icky about abortion, but I think it should be legal" to "abortion must absolutely be legal and the law and fundies and the catholics need to GTFO of it."

Time to go give Planned Parenthood more $$.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or anything end-of-life related. A close friend's father was dying of leukemia. He was at home in the final stages of the disease, unconscious most of the time. He had a heart attack. My friend, who was one of his caretakers, panicked and called an ambulance, which transported him to the closest hospital. It was a Catholic facility. The hospital installed a *pacemaker* in a dying, 80-something-year-old man. His family was bewildered and furious that they'd performed the surgery. When his family demanded to know why this was done on him, they were informed that their guidelines didn't stipulate a pacemaker as a heroic, extraordinary measure. It was considered a lifesaving measure, and they therefore felt morally bound to install it in him. To give him a "natural death," dontchaknow.

Once they got him back home my friend consulted with his doctor, who advised the family that when his vitals went wonky again they were to inform the ambulance that they were to take him to the local non-Catholic, community hospital, where he'd be made comfortable and where they would most probably not take any intrusive measures to prolong his life.

This all happened ten or more years ago, and my friend still gets indignant talking about it.

*nods* Yup happens all the time. They did this with my grandfather only substitute "heart attack" for massive stroke and "feeding tube" for pacemaker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Induction would have killed the fetus as she was only 17 weeks along, which is two full months before the generally accepted "viability" period for any fetus. Her cervix was open because her body was trying to miscarry but could not finish the job itself. The baby was doomed either way, but because this hospital stuck to the letter of the law, they took the mother along with it.

*facepalm* I forgot about the viability issue and how that would be a problem for them

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.