DO I HAVE TO SEE A MIDWIFE LEGALLY?

[JL1]

I am 9 weeks pregnant and do not wish to see a lecturing midwife. Do I have the right to refuse treatment until the birth? If not, why?

Yes, it is easy to think that you don't need intervention if previous pregnancies have been fine.

My first was fine, probably could have gone right the way through without seeing a midwife. This time I have got gestational diabetes, which carries a higher risk of complications if left untreated. Why would you want to put yourself and baby at risk?

Anyway, you're probably a troll so I won't bother you further.

Bloody hell - normally trolls don't bother me but this one was very aggravating

However, there were a lot of good responses on this thread so maybe that makes up for it.

Seeing a midwife is not having treatment.

I will tell you something. If I had decided to not see my midwife the chances are my son would be in a grave.

Think about what you are doing.

the absolute height of bad manners to ask for advice and assistance, and then bascially ignore everything offered

and there has been good advice here

i hope it helps somoene, as clearly teh OP is not lsitening

I think it is a troll.
You can't class all midwives together, I have found them to be very caring-they can't do the job for the money, so it must be a vocation. I have never been lectured.

I can see why you might get lectured, if you take such a defensive stance and don't listen to reason.
I think it is selfish; the health of your unborn DC should come before ideologies.

Bringing thalidomide into it is ridiculous-noone is going to make you take medication that you don't want.

I hope that if OP isn't a troll she isn't too influenced by her DP, who is not the one putting his life at risk!

haven't read entire thread but am sniggering about the "legal" side of this

can just imagine a policeman knocking on JL's door
"it has come to our attention that you haven't been seeing a midwife. I'm afraid we're going to have to arrest you for non-attendance of ante-natal care, you do not have to say anyhting... etc etc etc"
pmsl

I am not a troll and dont even know what a troll is?? I would guess someone posting on forums to rile others up. I don't go on forums & just wanted one question answered.
I tried googling to see if I could find out if it was law that you had to see a midwife throughout the pregnancy. Nothing there so I thought someone else may know the answer here.
Got my answer along with name calling, fingerpointing and sarcasm.
I believe in fate.... I have listened to your advice and will check out some of the useful websites.

what's the point of this being a troll? Unless it is to get some painful stories, in which case that's awful

In reply to this is yesterday~~~Have you not heard of social services? Im sure they could intervene, or was.
Legal doesnt always involve the police and arresting people. Your ignorance made me pmsl.

my ignorance? lol

ahh dear. pot? kettle?

Ok JL1 - try this for fate - pre NHS, pre structured ante-natal care it was the fate for many, many woman and their children to die in childbed. You want to go ahead and be all 'i'm in control' - go for it, but remember this - it's your health you are risking, it's your life you are risking, it's the life of your child and the future happiness of the children you already have. So by all means be informed, by all means deal with any bad care you've received but don't cut yourself off from professional skilled care because you're too damn stubborn to accept other people know how to birth babies too.

JL1 - if things go terribly wrong will you be calling for an ambulance and expecting the medical profession to save your life, and that of your unborn child?

JL1 - have you googled the statistics for perinatal mortality and the increased risks to both mother and baby when there is no antenatal care?

If this pregnancy and birth go well and the baby is born safe and well, this will not be because you have had no antenatal care - it will be in spite of the lack of antenatal care, and pure luck, imo.

Do you know what conditions can affect the baby in utero? Could you diagnose pre-eclampsia yourself? Or gestational diabetes? How will you know what position your baby is in? Will your husband know what to do if the baby is a breech presentation, or if you start haemorrhaging, or if the baby doesn't breath when born? God forbid, but what if the baby is born blue, and you are haemorrhaging, will he be able to help you both?

Lots of people have told you that there is a compromise to be had - firstly there are plenty of wonderful midwives out there who will support you in a home birth and will only provide the monitoring that you are willing to accept antenatally and during the birth.

There's a good reason why midwives are trained for years - because, whilst birth can be, and often is, utterly without any complications and results in a healthy mum and a healthy baby, when things DO go wrong, mums and babies can die.

Will you be able to live with yourself if, due to your decision to refuse antenatal care, your baby is not born healthy and unharmed? Will your husband still be happy with your decision if he is left with three (or possibly only two, in the worst case scenario) motherless children to raise?

Because that is a possibility. You could die or suffer permanent injury. So could your baby. Antenatal care could well help to prevent a problem becoming life-threatening.

As others have said, it's your choice, but it's a very selfish choice, in my opinion.

think of forums, like chatting in a pub, or park or mum & tots group

you ask a question

people respond, they converse, argue, debate, offer opinions

so if people ask you a qeustion on a forum, especially in repsonse to something such as freebirthing etc then you should be prepared to answer, as i presume you would do in real life

spotted this trip-trap at the beginning!

You dont legally have to have any medical care throughout a pregnancy. The only thing that is illegal is if you have someone with you 'pretending' to be a mw IYSWIM, no one but a MW can act in that capacity.

FWIW i think freebirthing is fecking crazy!

Great post sunnygirl.
Would you see a GP? Obstetrician?
Why do you think they are lecturing, and what about?

Oh ffs.

I am absolutley in favour of women aiming to have a positive and empowering birth experience, BUT do remember that in areas of the world where there is no help on call, many women and their babies die. They would love to have the luxury of refusing a midwife.

You don't use forums but use the abbreviation PMSL?

Unlikely, but a useful/interesting thread anyway.

quite interesting thread - even if there was some doubt about the OP's sincerity. A question that comes to me is whether a person who refuses all antenatal care is any more reckless than say, a person who refuses to get their child vaccinated for MMR? Both are potentially leaving themselves open to the risk of serious harm or death befalling the child.

Mrsboogie, that is completely different and quite inflammatory.

Parents who refuse the MMR for their child are (hopefully) making an informed decision on the basis of what they think is best for their child. At the first sign of, say, measles they would rush their child to medical treatment but are not prepared to take the risks they perceive to be related to the MMR.

Very, very different to sticking one's head in the sand during pregnancy ...

stillstanding I have to disagree - it may be of no help whatsoever to rush your child to medical attention if they show signs of measles - the virus can cause such terrible harm - once it is contracted there may be nothing to be done. Parents who feel they are making an informed choice about the MMR are of course now known to be totally wrong - since the flawed research that caused this concern has been totally debunked. Essentially here is no particular risk associated with MMR while there is a great risk associated with measles. There are some risks associated with childbirth but the risks of these are probably much less than those associated with neglecting to a child them vaccinated. In my opinion the OP would be taking a far greater risk if she didn't have her baby vaccinated for MMR than if she didn't have any antenatal care but was otherwise healthy.

btw I do know what I am talking about - me and my siblings nearly died from contracting measles in the seventies - my sister was six months old and contracted pneumonia and was left with a heart problem permanently - her being admitted to hospital at an early stage didn't prevent this.

Hmm, you see mrsboogie a question that comes to me is whether people who write posts such as yours blindly follow any 'advice' given to them without thinking through any other possible options

mrsboogie, you are assuming that people who do not vaccinate for MMR have done so on the "advice" of Dr Wakefield. My eldest child is not vaccinated and he is 13, way too old for the choice to have been based simply on thw "wafkefield report".

Gosh no - I certainly don't follow advice blindly - but I don't need anyone to advise me that it is a good idea to take a low risk action to prevent my child from getting a terrible disease that I nearly died from myself.