Refusal to Consent to Caesarean Section as Neglect of the Child?
Defendants V.M. [the mother] and B.G. [the father] appeal from the judgment ... which found that they abused and neglected their child, J.M.G. As a result of these findings, J.M.G. was placed in the custody and care of plaintiff Division of Youth and Family Services (DYFS). At a permanency hearing the judge approved DYFS's plan for termination of parental rights....
Legally Kidnapped
Pages
Friday, July 17, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Guess what
Privacy Policy
Infolinks In Text Ads
Analyetics
2 comments:
Yet another case of a child being stolen instead of a mother receiving treatment. While I agree refusing a c-section with a distressed baby is stupid and I would never dare be so bold, the baby is fine. What seems to be the issue is the past with mental health troubles. Why not treat the woman instead of stealing her baby?
Makes me wonder why folks like Sarah Palin are applauded as bold and mothers without resources have children stolen by the state. Remember Sarah Palin flew 12 hours with broken waters a high risk pregnancy with a Downs baby. He is fine, but it was incredibly dangerous and stupid.
Same situation but very different outcomes for these two mothers, eh?
Now a days almost everyone are opting for caesarean section. Some years ago, it has been said that ‘Once a caesarean, always a caesarean’. Later on it was found that Vaginal Birth After Caesarean was proven to be safe and effective. Also all post-caesarean pregnancies do not need repeat CS and most of them could have unfussy vaginal delivery.
Post a Comment