New Posts  All Forums:
 

UC article in FL newspaper - Page 2

post #21 of 132
6/2/06 at 6:39pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamabearing
No, I really think she would have lived. Sounds like there was plenty of time to save her life.
I totally agree. The more I read and watch on this, the more I wonder about what their motivation was? Why transport her the first time and then leave her to die the second? ANY midwife working in that capacity would have transported her. Myself as a UCer would have done multiple things, but if I were still bleeding out at the 1-2 hour mark I would have called 911 myself. When I first started delving into this, I thought the "midwives" had acted in an appropriate manner, she had still died, and the authorities were taking it out on the women who attended her. However, now it seems to me that they were NOT acting appropriately at all. Not as any midwife I have ever known would have acted, in any case.
Sponsored Links
post #22 of 132
6/2/06 at 7:07pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chantelhayes
So the only thing they did to prevent death from bleeding (from what this article says) is holding hands and praying? That's NOT the practice of midwifery.
Medical attention was never denied.
When a mother decides to have a Medically Unassisted Childbirth, she does not mean "a homebirth with a Midwife". It means she only wants her support team or some mothers prefer to be completely alone.
Why should anyone be punished?
post #23 of 132
6/2/06 at 7:49pm

I think you might want to look into it a little more

She chose them to provide care at the birth. They did vag exams, perineal massage, used a doppler to listen to heart tones....

Afterward they gave her a gatorade enema (huh?) fed her soup with a bulb syringe until she lost conciousness. Four hours after baby born, and apparently quite a long time after she was no longer concious, they called 911.

She would be better off with no midwife than these two pretending to be.

Seriously, she would have been.
post #24 of 132
6/2/06 at 7:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by laurashanley
An article about the trial can be found here - http://www.courttv.com/trials/taped/...round_ctv.html

It's possible that this woman might have lived had she been in the hospital. But this doesn't prove that homebirth is inherently dangerous or that those of us who support it are idiots. There is plenty of evidence proving that in most cases homebirth is safer than hospital birth.
Laura
Quote:
Mara McGlade died two days later.
Quote:
Florida law...it does not prohibit someone from having a home birth without the help of a doctor, nurse or midwife
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamabearing
She chose them to provide care at the birth. They did vag exams, perineal massage, used a doppler to listen to heart tones....
They did not break the law.
post #25 of 132
6/2/06 at 8:34pm

I think they did break the law

They were practicing midwifery without a license. I watched a lot of the trial and you'd have to have a very skewed take on the evidence to think they were not.

Had they NOT acted as midwifes the mother would be better off.

She would have gotten real help.

The fact they kept "treating" her and she thought she was getting care is what brought her to the point of no return. She would have gotten herself on the phone for help had they not been acting as midwives. Better to have NO professional at a birth than a pretend one.
post #26 of 132
6/2/06 at 8:45pm
They were acting as her midwives IMO, why else were they wearing scrubs. I think they failed this woman and so did her husband. Please if I'm bleeding to death do more than pray, sorry but that just pisses me off. This woman is now dead and her children no longer have their mother.
post #27 of 132
6/2/06 at 8:50pm

I think if all they had done was pray they would not have been convicted

I know that's what you meant though. I agree the husband was very much at fault too.
post #28 of 132
6/2/06 at 8:53pm
You are right and I didn't mean that after they prayed they didn't do other f'ed up things , none which was to actually save the woman.
Just as a disclaimer there is nothing wrong with praying if that is part of your beliefs but along with that these people should have actually tried to save the dieing woman's life.
post #29 of 132
6/2/06 at 9:01pm

did you feel like Ron Kubee was just not getting the point?

He is the commentator with the ponytail. His take was that if she had a right to an unassisted childbirth then it was ok for these psuedomidwifes to practice without calling themselves midwives.

It really made me mad because she truly probably would have been safer if they were not there at all. They gave her a false sense she was being taken care of. I wished I could have called in. It really bothered me. This issue is at the heart of practicing any profession without a license.
post #30 of 132
6/2/06 at 11:34pm
Quote:
They were practicing midwifery without a license.
And that should be entirely legal.

In any case, no, it clearly wasn't an unassisted birth.
post #31 of 132
6/3/06 at 12:51am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheacoby
They were acting as her midwives IMO, why else were they wearing scrubs. I think they failed this woman and so did her husband. Please if I'm bleeding to death do more than pray, sorry but that just pisses me off. This woman is now dead and her children no longer have their mother.
So, it is only okay to assist at a birth if you have been trained by the Midwifery association?
Why do ppl believe Western Medicine is the only medicine?
Why do ppl believe Birthing is a medical thing? It is not. No where does a person need to have a degree to check a females cervix. Should my DH be charged for "practicing medicine without a license" when he checks my cervix? He would know better than some stranger what is going on with it.
post #32 of 132
6/3/06 at 12:54am
Quote:
Originally Posted by fourlittlebirds
And that should be entirely legal.

In any case, no, it clearly wasn't an unassisted birth.
It clearly was a Medically Unassisted Birth,as there was no one in attendance that was trained by the Medical Industry.
post #33 of 132
6/3/06 at 1:35am
Quote:
Originally Posted by MamaInTheBoonies
It clearly was a Medically Unassisted Birth,as there was no one in attendance that was trained by the Medical Industry.
I don't think "medical" is defined in that way legally, or else one couldn't be charged with practice medicine without a license.

Quote:
Why do ppl believe Birthing is a medical thing? It is not. No where does a person need to have a degree to check a females cervix. Should my DH be charged for "practicing medicine without a license" when he checks my cervix?
ITA.
post #34 of 132
6/3/06 at 1:41am
Quote:
Originally Posted by fourlittlebirds
I don't think "medical" is defined in that way legally, or else one couldn't be charged with practice medicine without a license.
IMO and IME, Birthing has no business being associated with the Medical Industry.

Western Medicine has not been around that long, whereas Birth has been around since the beginning of life.

You don't need to be a licensed Doctor/Nurse/Whatever, in order to learn how to set a broken bone, stitch, give an enema, run an oxygen tank.
I see elderly ppl walking around in public operating their oxygen tanks.

These women never denied medical assistance, nor did they try to perform a cesarean or any such thing.
post #35 of 132
6/3/06 at 1:46am

gosh Mamma in Boonies I don't get it

Did you see the trial? I am suprised anyone is defending them. Just because someone isn't trained in a profession doesn't mean they can't practice it. That's one way of practicing without a license. They were taking on the role of midwives, not doulas or labor support. They had oxygen and a doppler stethoscope--they were administering treatments to try to get her to stop bleeding....they were examining the placenta and telling her about fragments and what to do next. You may not want to call that midwifery but obviously...they took on the role at a birth the midwife would normally take. I don't think a husband checking a cervix is a fair analogy. If you husband had delivered 12 other women's babies and was delivering his daughter in law, listening to heart tones, giving her gatorade enemas, perineal massage and checking the placenta for fragments, massaging the uterus and assessing the bleeding....that would be an analogy. Actually if a man had been in charge and done the same thing one wonders if he wouldn't have been charged with reckless disregard for human life.

Most important point, the mother's trust in their expertise -- probably stopped her from getting competent help as she would have in a truly DIY situation.
post #36 of 132
6/3/06 at 1:46am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheacoby
You are right and I didn't mean that after they prayed they didn't do other f'ed up things , none which was to actually save the woman.
The woman died in the hospital after two days of Western Medicine. Why not hold them accountable? Why not hold the others responsible for not calling an ambulance?
post #37 of 132
6/3/06 at 1:52am

did you see it?

She coded in the ambulance. No heart rate no breathing....putting her on a ventilator for two days and giving all sort of drugs to try to keep her heart going doesn't mean she was salvagable.

Why don't we dig her up and bring her to the hospital and blame them for not saving her while were at it?
post #38 of 132
6/3/06 at 1:55am

apparently they had to run codes on her over and over

apparently the father was insisting. But he didn't stick around to see if they even worked. I think they coded her 16 times in two days.

If you throw your baby in a pool and pull her out after 10 minutes she might live a couple days in the hospital....it doesn't mean you blame the hospital.
post #39 of 132
6/3/06 at 1:57am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamabearing
Did you see the trial? I am suprised anyone is defending them.
Most important point, the mother's trust in their expertise -- probably stopped her from getting competent help as she would have in a truly DIY situation.
I am not just defending them, but the many mothers who give birth without midwives or Western Medicine.

If what they did was so wrong/illegal, why weren't they charged the first time the same mother gave birth?
post #40 of 132
6/3/06 at 2:00am

more

[ Why not hold the others responsible for not calling an ambulance?[/QUOTE]

They were trusting the judgements of the midwives...without the midwives their they might have called. But I do think the others hold moral responsibilty for not intervening. Especially the husband. The RNs who were there as friends...maybe yes too. You would think they would have been able to recognize shock.