Worried about circ w/o our consent - Page 3

[vachi73]

Hi Christa - we are planning to deliver at either P/SL or Rose, depending on how far I get. If before 30 weeks, we will probably go to P/SL; if after 30-32 weeks, probably at Rose because it's walking distance from our house, has a Level 3a NICU, and is a little smaller overall (therefore less intimidating) than P/SL. However, my MFM docs deliver at both, so either is still a possibility.

Any thoughts, experience, recommendations would definitely be appreciated. This whole pregnancy has been more or less a total disaster, sorry to say ... from violent vomiting since 6 weeks' gestation to a huge hemorrhage at 12.5 weeks to bedrest for the last 10 weeks ... *sigh* Somehow, "let's have a third" didn't seem nearly as crazy as it's turned out, with #3 and #4 on the way and mommy somewhat out of commission! But I think we will LOVE it if/when everyone is here, safe and sound, intact, and hopefully nursing up a storm Just have to make it until then!!

Thanks for offering to help - I really appreciate it. Feel free to PM me if easier.

[ChristaN]

We just got home from being out of town. I'll see if I can find anything out for you.

[smeep]

Originally Posted by Night_Nurse

Just wanted to chime in with my two cents...

Sure, while a doctor or nurse intentionally doing something like circ deliberately against the parents wishes is possible, it's very unlikely.
The U.S. is a very litigious society. Practically all the doctors and nurse I know work because they have families to support and bills to pay. Likewise, hospitals are in business to make a profit and there is so much competition their good standing in the community is highly prized (maybe it's a different story if they are the only hospital in a 50 mile radius or something).

I don't think a doctor/nurse/hospital would do something to a patient out of spite for fear of a lawsuit (rightfully so). If a doctor did this, not only would he/she be sued, but the insurance company would drop them and the hospital would most likely drop his/her admitting privileges. Without a hospital or insurance to back them, the doctor can't work, and can't pay his bills and looses his livelihood.

Ah, but if you read the whole bit (in the link) on the case in Dallas, apparently the doctor has been sued TWICE for it (and there's no telling how many other times he did it but just wasn't prosecuted for it) and was STILL allowed to continue practicing. The quoted case was settled for a mere $230,000 and the doctor was reprimanded for "failure to practice medicine in an acceptable manner." That's nothing more than a slap on the wrist, yet not only did he mutilate a child IN SPITE OF the parents, but this was his SECOND legal go-round for it!

So, while what you say is mostly true, when it comes to circumcision (and many obstetrically-related things), very rarely are there any true consequences. Doctors who circumcise an infant without parental consent, and especially AGAINST extremely vocal refusals, should lose their licenses at minimum, that is simply not the case for most. All because circumcision is seen as something that's "not the end of the world" (to quote the dear Dr. Taylor). It's this attitude that keeps RIC from falling under the same legal and ethical category as FGM.

[becca_howell]

I haven't read the three pages of replies, but I wanted to say that when my DS was born, we had to sign a refusal of consent for his vit K and eye prophylaxis. There was an "other" space, so I wrote circumcision and Hep B on there too. Maybe you could do something like that?

[Crunchy Frog]

Originally Posted by smeep

Ah, but if you read the whole bit (in the link) on the case in Dallas, apparently the doctor has been sued TWICE for it (and there's no telling how many other times he did it but just wasn't prosecuted for it) and was STILL allowed to continue practicing. The quoted case was settled for a mere $230,000 and the doctor was reprimanded for "failure to practice medicine in an acceptable manner." That's nothing more than a slap on the wrist, yet not only did he mutilate a child IN SPITE OF the parents, but this was his SECOND legal go-round for it!

Just one correction. It was $23,000, not 230,000. Almost nothing in other words. Not much of a deterrent.