Sorry but Anyfucker is wrong, and not for the reasons that people might think.
I am having an ELCS for psychological reasons. One of these reasons is due to issues regarding consent.
I have an enormously supportive midwives who have said that they will do everything to try and help me, and to minimise issues over examinations. However they have stressed that there may be certain situations where it might be dangerous not to have an examination and that a catheter is unavoidable.
I have had a fairly easy time getting an ELCS approved; one of their main arguments at my hospital, is that they would rather work with women and try and built up trust rather than have situations where women like the OP, might be so scared they avoid all medical assistance and contact and freebirth.
However, an ELCS does not mean you avoid any medical staff between legs.... its just a different situation. You need a catheter and you may need to be cleaned (though you can refuse anal pain killers). It depends on how you feel about being in control and whether being immobile might actually fuel the anxiety rather than help it. Its a very personal choice.
If I go into labour early, it has been made clear that I may need an examination, depending on the circumstances. If there is a suspicion of a prolapsed cord for example. This is for the safety of mother and baby. This terrifies me and I am hoping and praying that I don't end up in this situation. They have said they will respect my wishes and avoid it, unless absolutely necessary though. Whilst I don't like it, I do think they have to be honest about this, and make the point that totally refusing could be irresponsible and life threatening. If put into a position like this, I would need to know exactly why it was necessary and why there is no alternative available before consenting - my DH is aware of this and its all over my notes.
The issue here is NOT the examinations themselves. Its the sensitivity with which the OP is being dealt with in my honest opinion. There is clearly a lack of trust here, that somehow needs to be addressed.
When I look at this paragraph:
All staff at the hospital are adamant that my consent will be sought before any proceduce and that they will make it as comfortable as possible but that I am not permitted to not consent. Does that make sense? In effect I have to do it! Finally today, after much harrasment from me and from the staff they have agreed to my wishes but say I must come in to hospital and sign a document saying all negative outcomes (ranging from maternal and/or fetal death to tearing) are a direct result of my choices. I've also had one midwife tell me that labours without vaginal examinations usually result in dead babies.
I do wonder what conversation has actually been had and how the OP has interpreted it. Has there been a breakdown in communication somewhere along the line or has the OP genuinely been treated with contempt for her wishes and a general lack of empathy. In all honesty its very difficult to tell, and on one of my bad days, I know that I could draw similar conclusions from things that have been said to me, if they haven't been quite so sensitive about my anxieties.
I genuinely feel that the OP would benefit from the support of ante-natal mental health services if they are available at the hospital she is at, and would also benefit from somehow building up a trust with a particular midwife or midwives who would be at the birth. Whether this is realistic or not, I don't know as I don't know what the time frame here is - but I think this is the only real option open to the OP given how strongly she feels and how it seems that she is unable to consider any exceptions at all to her rules.
I also think drawing up compromises, under certain situations needs to be the step forward, but I do think this needs to be done with the assistance of a specialist team who understand anxieties of this nature. Being so generalised and vague adds to the anxiety.