Help end medical misogyny. Sign our petition.

Help end medical misogyny.
Sign our petition.

Sign the petition

Please or to access all these features

Telly addicts

Has anyone watched Maternal Instinct (Netflix) yet?

88 replies

Hinthebuild · 12/06/2026 17:15

Has anyone watched the new documentary on Netflix called Maternal Instinct yet? I had never heard of this case before and am just absolutely stunned. 🤯 How can someone have the capacity for such evil?

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music that you love, upload original content and share it all with friends, family and the world on YouTube.

https://youtu.be/fzW61JgRbNk?si=U03-NaZ_0SWi16SV

OP posts:
VelvetLace · 18/06/2026 16:00

Thebigonesgetaway · 18/06/2026 12:00

Yeah I think yoire going down a dodgy path of accusing doctors to wish to do a hysterectomy when it wasn’t required. This would be very unusual. Life isn’t like tne movies.

Her mother and her husband gave consent, ghe fact it was done during the surgery would indicate it was basically the only option when they went in . It is normal to give the ability to consent to your relatives when you’re in surgery.

I don’t think there is any suggestion the doctors acted improperly here. From her or her family, as such I’d assume this was absolutely required.

To be fair, she had been telling people that she wanted to sue the doctor who performed the hysterectomy around the same time that she was begging people to be her surrogate. I remember this being stated right after the crime first happened. A lot of information was left out of the Netflix documentary, probably due to time limitations.

Thebigonesgetaway · 18/06/2026 16:39

VelvetLace · 18/06/2026 16:00

To be fair, she had been telling people that she wanted to sue the doctor who performed the hysterectomy around the same time that she was begging people to be her surrogate. I remember this being stated right after the crime first happened. A lot of information was left out of the Netflix documentary, probably due to time limitations.

Yeah but she didn’t sue and she wasn’t right in the head clearly. If there was medical negligence st play she could easily have managed that they’d have settled as well.

no surgeons are just giving someone a hysterectomy for the sheer hell of it as she’d some endo, that would be as rare as rocking horse shit. It’s highly likely it was so bad and her tubes so damaged she couldn’t ever have conceived.

ss said, I’d really not be going down the route of there must have been signficant medical negligence at play. I very much doubt that, I would assume what they found was so bad they had to act.

Twasasurprise · 18/06/2026 16:53

I'm not an expert and certainly hope it's not the case, but wonder that if going against medical advice to undergo a hysterectomy at the time, could cause her insurance company to deny covering the surgery at a later date? Much cheaper to do it all at one time than 2 separate surgeries.

Not that health decisions should be based on this, but in the US medical cost is often a deciding factor that wouldn't occur to us with the NHS. For the insurance companies, it's all about the bottom line.

Also, I'm surprised she didn't technically give written consent for a hysterectomy. Is it not normally something you're warned about as a possibility if medically required during the consent discussion before signing the paperwork?

It was a while ago, but I'm pretty sure I had to give consent for possible hysterectomy during my tubal ligation with c-section in the US. I tend to trust the medics judgement on medical matters and consented knowing that my family was complete and I had chosen to be sterilised in any case. (The hysterectomy came later back in the UK.)

I was surprised they removed her cervix too. Could there have been HPV cervical pre-cancer presence too? They left an ovary, so I don't think it was a case of just whipping everything out willy-nilly.

WhimsyWhim · 18/06/2026 17:32

SLNM · 18/06/2026 13:54

As PP have said, this wasn't a situation where her life was in imminent danger. The specific gynaecological issues (ectopic pregnancy, endometriosis, cysts on ovaries) that she was experiencing did not necessitate an emergency full-blown hysterectomy in her case. She had even been unknowingly living with the cysts on her ovaries and endometriosis up until that point which further supports the point that is being made. The woman is a monster but am not sure how you could justify this.

They could have just removed the ectopic pregnancy (which was the goal of the surgery) and waited until she was out of surgery to discuss what was seen and determine if she would like a hysterectomy to be performed in the future. It's clear that she wouldn't have agreed to a hysterectomy based on the way that she reacted when told. I won't speak for others, but what I am saying is that she wasn't going to die if she didn't have the hysterectomy, so it wasn't the only option. A discussion could have been had.

This. Exactly this.

Thebigonesgetaway · 18/06/2026 18:05

WhimsyWhim · 18/06/2026 17:32

This. Exactly this.

Not exactly this this poster is guessing and has absolutely no idea why she was given a hysterectomy as the full details are not released.

WhimsyWhim · 18/06/2026 18:11

Twasasurprise · 18/06/2026 16:53

I'm not an expert and certainly hope it's not the case, but wonder that if going against medical advice to undergo a hysterectomy at the time, could cause her insurance company to deny covering the surgery at a later date? Much cheaper to do it all at one time than 2 separate surgeries.

Not that health decisions should be based on this, but in the US medical cost is often a deciding factor that wouldn't occur to us with the NHS. For the insurance companies, it's all about the bottom line.

Also, I'm surprised she didn't technically give written consent for a hysterectomy. Is it not normally something you're warned about as a possibility if medically required during the consent discussion before signing the paperwork?

It was a while ago, but I'm pretty sure I had to give consent for possible hysterectomy during my tubal ligation with c-section in the US. I tend to trust the medics judgement on medical matters and consented knowing that my family was complete and I had chosen to be sterilised in any case. (The hysterectomy came later back in the UK.)

I was surprised they removed her cervix too. Could there have been HPV cervical pre-cancer presence too? They left an ovary, so I don't think it was a case of just whipping everything out willy-nilly.

The written consent form would only include consent to perform any necessary action in the event of a life-threatening emergency occurring during surgery. This was an elective hysterectomy because it was not needed to save her life. (I know this for sure because they wouldn't have even asked for her husband's consent if it was life-threatening.)

I believe they only left an ovary because removing both of the ovaries will throw someone into menopause prematurely.

I support hysterectomies for those that choose them, but it's quite frightening to me to think that I or anyone else could have surgery and wake up with my reproductive organs removed because a doctor noticed something like endometriosis whilst in there, and my family member consented to it on my behalf.

WhimsyWhim · 18/06/2026 18:30

Thebigonesgetaway · 18/06/2026 18:05

Not exactly this this poster is guessing and has absolutely no idea why she was given a hysterectomy as the full details are not released.

I know for certain that it was elective and not a life-threatening situation because the doctor would not have asked for her husband’s consent if it was. They do not bother to ask for consent from family members in life-threatening emergencies during surgery because time is of the essence and can’t be wasted. They’re not going to let someone die whilst they go ask their patient’s family member if they can do what’s necessary to save their patient’s life.

Twasasurprise · 18/06/2026 18:43

WhimsyWhim · 18/06/2026 18:11

The written consent form would only include consent to perform any necessary action in the event of a life-threatening emergency occurring during surgery. This was an elective hysterectomy because it was not needed to save her life. (I know this for sure because they wouldn't have even asked for her husband's consent if it was life-threatening.)

I believe they only left an ovary because removing both of the ovaries will throw someone into menopause prematurely.

I support hysterectomies for those that choose them, but it's quite frightening to me to think that I or anyone else could have surgery and wake up with my reproductive organs removed because a doctor noticed something like endometriosis whilst in there, and my family member consented to it on my behalf.

It's also rather more frightening that many surgeons or hospitals there won't perform tubal ligations or hysterectomies on married women without their husband's consent! Who cares what the woman wants or needs for her health!

The surgery didn't have to stop for consent to be obtained, unless you are saying only the actual surgeon can request and physically obtain the signature? Consent from the husband could have been sought, even during a life-threatening emergency, with preventing potential litigation in mind.

Again, I don't think endometriosis was the reason for the hysterectomy; it seems like there was a lot more to the medical complications than we are privy to.

thelongesday · 18/06/2026 19:20

The delusions, the fake life, the complete lack of empathy, the complete lack of remorse - got to be in pretty severe personality disorder territory that one.

LikeWhoUsesTypewritersAnyway · 18/06/2026 19:28

Watched this now. It was VERY good. Very disturbing and tragic. 😢

Member984815 · Yesterday 15:33

Twasasurprise · 18/06/2026 09:42

Yes, she had already had the tubal ligation too.

Her children I don't think were removed from her, she just seemed to have no interest in raising them. I think the second one she didn't contest custody in the divorce, and the first she had very young.

I saw on reddit that she seems to have brain damage issues from her childhood/ teens. Also a sexual assault brushed under the carpet by her guardian, huge weight gain as a child, various health issues, a gastric sleeve, a baby in her teens, a hysterectomy she hadn't herself consented to. Certainly not making excuses, just that there was a lot more to this story with a lot going on in her background before this. Too much to fit into the documentary.

This wasn't even the first pregnancy she faked with Wade. She'd claimed to be pregnant with his twins right at the start of the relationship too, but "lost" them in an accident.

I know I'm a lone voice on here thinking Wade bears some moral responsibility. On Reddit though, many agree. The outcome of Reagan's husbands civil claim is unclear; it may still be ongoing. His legal claim against Wade seems to be limited to him owning the vehicle she used to kidnap the baby.

Wade was blinded by the money. He was expecting to reap millions so didn't rock the boat with her despite everyone telling him that she wasn't pregnant. He must have known too, but just had his eyes on the prize.

Obviously no-one could expect what actually happened, but the medics cared enough to fear an abduction and try to prevent that possibility.

The way he treats and abuses animals doesn't make him a sympathetic character either. I don't know if he is low IQ or simply low in morals.

I wholeheartedly agree with this

BrownRedPink · Yesterday 18:23

I've just read that Taylor admitted to holding baby Braxlynn up to Reagan's face and saying, "Tell your mama bye" after she had cut and pulled her from Reagan's uterus. Bloody hell! I don't think there are many crimes that even come close to being as heinous as this.

She also convinced a mentally vulnerable inmate named Hanna that she was in jail with (prior to trial) to write a 13-page false confession letter.

https://www.scribd.com/document/599913615/Third-Supplement-to-Notice-of-Intent-to-Use-Extraneous-Offenses

Client Challenge

https://www.scribd.com/document/599913615/Third-Supplement-to-Notice-of-Intent-to-Use-Extraneous-Offenses

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread