Obstetric violence - legs forced open against my will

[NibliaBiblia]

When I was in labour with my daughter, the midwives spent twenty minutes trying to force my legs open to get me flat on my back with my legs up. There was no emergency. It was so they could get a better CTG reading. I physically resisted for as long as I could and verbally told them to stop. They didn't stop until I gave up. After that they did other things without my consent, but I did not they to stop them again.
I complained to the hospital and they have done nothing. I complained to the police and they told me there must have been an emergency. I've complained to the NMC and the CQC. I hope they will do something but it's a long process so I won't know for a long time.
The police used to say that domestic violence was a private matter. They used to say that if you got in the car/went into the apartment/were drinking then you must have agreed to it. I think this is exactly the same type of justification, applied to equally criminal behaviour.
I don't think my experience is abnormal. I think this is fairly routine. They thought that when I gave up that meant I consented.

I think the posters who are suggesting that mothers in labour can legally refuse all treatment even if it means threatening the life of the unborn baby, are legally right.
Not a maternal care health story but there is the recent case of the paranoid schizophrenic, who refused medical treatment and medication because he was frightened of needles. He went on to murder a number of people.
From the Guardian, Valdo Calocane repeatedly avoided taking his prescribed antipsychotic medication. Care reviews and inquiries revealed he refused long-acting injectable (depot) medications because he disliked needles. He refused other treatment as well.
I have no idea about medical treatment and the law. Posters tell us that any female in labour can refuse treatment even if the lack of treatment harms the baby. I think this is the case. I was shocked by the story of Valdo Calocane that his right to refuse to consent to treatment resulted in brutal murders. That cannot be morally right even if it is legally right.
I presume the mother's life and indeed her rights, trump that of the unborn baby. The law is clear that the mother's life trumps that of the baby until the baby is born. I am not sure where the law stands on all patients with regard to consent. Presumably the same rights apply.

I’m not understanding why legs had to be forced open for CTG if I’m honest? My baby is as monitored throughout and I’m genuinely not understanding where legs being open comes into it?

A close friend of mine left a long career in midwifery, recently. Highly trained, and trying to the right thing for mothers in their most vulnerable moments, aswell as preserve the life of their unborn child; the argumentative and hostile resistance she met with from some ‘patients’ and their SO’s was too much and she quit with a heavy heart.

Would someone with serious mental illness like that have full capacity to consent?

It is interesting. Also cases where JWs have declined blood transfusions that would have saved them and left children without a parent, it’s just the way it is,

It's context-dependent, or should be. I was disturbed to learn that far more women than men die when their heart stops in a public place. People are reluctant to give a woman CPR because they'd have to move her clothing and push her breasts out of the way - they fear being accused of sexual assault. It feels like this might be a reasonable fear.

Because she was about to give birth, by the sound of things.

I had my DD over 50 years ago. She was my second. I said very clearly during labour: "I Do Not Want To Be Cut". They cut without my consent and I cried. I had been cut with my first without consent also and didn't realise the consequences!

It isn't until I read these quotes and experiences that I realised it was assault. I still have the mental scars.

No of course not.

If you are told you need a lifesaving operation, and you say you don't want it, are your doctors medically negligent if you die? Do you think they should use force to take you to the operating theatre against your will?

The law is exactly the same when a woman is pregnant. A baby in her uterus doesn't affect her rights over her own body.

They might have wanted to attach the monitor to the baby's scalp.

Legally, the OP is perfectly within her rights to refuse treatment. I am really sorry this happened to you, OP, but it is quite hard to get any kind of redress in these situations. You can try writing to the hospital chief exec if the initial complaint wasn't dealt with satisfactorily, and if that doesn't work you can try the Patient Ombudsman.

You could also ask for advice from the charity Birthrights. (Someone may have suggested this - sorry, I haven't read the whole thread.)

Legally, you have an absolute right to refuse medical treatment even if that means you and/or your baby will die.

The alternative, that women could be FORCED to have medical treatment against their will, would be a step down a very dark path. Women are fully human, we don't lose our rights and become just vessels because we are pregnant.

I've never thought about it until now but it's obvious as an unborn baby is not independent.

It was an institutionalised assault, everyone had the same treatment at that time, whether it was needed or not.

OP must have Olympic-strength thighs, if two nurses couldn't force them apart for twenty minutes.

I think it's because they kept trying to pull back while the bed was up high, instead of lowering the bed to get more leverage. I don't think they were thinking very clearly tbh

The key case law for labour is St George’s v S where a woman with severe pre-eclampsia refused a section and was not held to be incapacitated even though it was clearly putting her and her child at serious risk. The test in St George’s is clear - it isn’t about risk to the child or the mother. The test is only one of capacity. In Re MB, a woman consented to a section but then withdrew consent when it came down to it due to a severe needle phobia. She was considered to be incapacitated by that phobia in the moment. Again, capacity is key.

I can see why the legal test is what it is although it is hard to get your head around the extreme examples of where the legal test gets you.

Seeing a person about to jump off a bridge would give you good reason to assume they lack capacity to make a decision.
You can't make the same assumption just because a woman is pregnant or in labour.

That's true, but OP had booked in with a midwife, turned up in labour, gone into the room, consented to having a midwife there while she gave birth. Then when actively giving birth she said 'stop holding my legs', the midwives stopped for a minute, then pickd them up again to open her pelvis so baby, who was in distress, could come out quickly. She lay on the bed while they examined hr, and neither her nor her partner said anything during the, completeley medically indicated and valid, interventions. How is this an assault?

It's not like they burst into her house at night and held her legs open while she screamed no for the fun of it, is it?

Being so black and white and 'It's an ASSAULT as she DID NOT CONSENT' is missing the subtelty and context of the situation

I thought meconium during birth was a sign that the baby could be in distress. Also OP said she thought that the monitor might be slipping, so surely that was why the medical team were trying to get her in a different position

I believe it’s not very brief at all. Though I’ve never had to do it. I did have training years ago but it’s a formal process with paperwork. Never seen it done in maternity.

I do agree that without being in the room it’s hard to assess. If OP said once “stop holding my legs” they might genuinely have thought she meant don’t hold my legs right now/during this contraction 🤷🏻‍♀️

I don't think anyone knows what happened here OP apart from the people in the room.

I hope you can find some resolution and peace with what happened.

I wonder what they do with people who are heavily intoxicated in a&e. Document the assumption that they lack capacity or irrational maybe?
Anyway there were no doubts raised about my capacity.

...

Not only did they have time to stop and think, @NibliaBiblia - they would have had time to back off, let you calm down for a few moments, and then try to explain to you why they needed to get a better trace - and maybe to say that you would only need to be on your back while they took the trace. They didn’t do anything to de-escalate the situation, and as a trained nurse (not a midwife) myself, I am pretty appalled at what they did.

some of the medical professionals treating this man really wanted him sectioned, where he could have been given medication against his will. I think there is an inquiry ongoing looking in to why he wasn't.