Agoraphobic mum-to-be forced to go to hospital for the birth

[UppityPuppity]

Judge states she doesn’t have the capacity to decide to have a home birth.

Not enough information to form a view about the supposed risks, except that I am so sad for her and wish her and the baby well.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57108649

Oh and I just realised you said delivering a baby.

She's to be taken to hosp before due date so could be in hosp for weeks. That would be just. Cruel.

Unless by deliver you meant CS? You say you wouldn't fancy it. You're a midwife or a surgeon?

It is awful and I’ve been thinking about it. Could she actually be put in restraints on the bed if she tries to leave? Will she sectioned afterwards? Will this encourage PND? Will SS be involved afterwards? What systems will be put in place if she is traumatised and need help?

Justice Holman said any restraint should not include “mechanical restraint”, the use of a “prone restraint position” or any techniques which would apply “pressure to the diaphragm or abdomen”

So what? People will be pushing down on her chest or stomach to keep her lying down. What madness is this?

She wants a home birth - unless there is an emergency. But the NHS wants her to have the baby in a "planned way" in hospital, due to the increased risks if she gives birth at home - BBC

So what is the issue here? Many women want home births but go to hospital if there is an emergency. She’s said she will go to hospital if their is an emergency. This is really wrong.

Gag I misread the second paragraph. Not enough coffee.

I’d be interested to know how they plan to restrain a heavily pregnant women. I know medical professionals used to push my mothers hands inwards towards her wrists when she was committed and trying to escape. I wonder if they will use this method..

So what is the issue here? Many women want home births but go to hospital if there is an emergency. She’ssaidshe will go to hospital if their is an emergency. This is really wrong.

At a guess, psychiatric medical professionals understand that when someone says yeah sure I will, it doesn't mean they will. Pregnant women are sectioned against their will for MH reasons already, guessing they will use the same proportionate force if required.

So what is the issue here? Many women want home births but go to hospital if there is an emergency. She’s saidshe will go to hospital if their is an emergency. This is really wrong.

At a guess, psychiatric medical professionals understand that when someone says yeah sure I will, it doesn't mean they will. Pregnant women are sectioned against their will for MH reasons already, guessing they will use the same proportionate force if required.

Agreed. Just because someone says that they will do something, it doesn't mean that they will. And what is an emergency to medical staff may not be an emergency to the woman.

Additionally, by the time there is an emergency it may be too late - the woman in question apparently lives in a remote location so it could take some time to get her to hospital.

I think this is the judgment, if anyone is still interested?

www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCOP/2021/33.html

I read that with horror. The balance of risk to a physically healthy young woman and baby - likely to have a highly unremarkable home birth against the distress and risk of forcing her to hospital did not seem to be taken into consideration.

Surely they should have pushed for as safe a home birth as possible.

Does that mean woman is not allowed a home birth a certain distance from a hospital in case she can’t get there in time for emergency intervention? What is the practical difference.

Re capacity - they wouldn’t have forced heart surgery in that case - but women’s autonomy doesn’t count.

Postscript.

The judge was later informed that on 22 May 2021 the mother went into spontaneous labour at home. She contacted the hospital and travelled there with the support of her partner and mother and the community midwife. While still at home, she received 2mg of Lorazepam orally. Although initially resistant, she was guided by staff and her family into the ambulance and no restraint was required or used. A few hours later she was safely delivered of a healthy baby boy with a good birth weight. She returned home with the baby within the next day or two.

Very best wishes to Mum and Baby.

I read that too. It seemed balanced and the decision the judge had to take was based on the fact that the Official Solicitor (representing the mother) agreed that a hospital birth was in the mother's best interests, so the only point of contention was how to manage the journey.

It seems entirely sensible to have everything planned in advance as an emergency court hearing while the mother is in labour is clearly not desirable.

I am very glad everything turned out well and no intervention was necessary.

This is so so difficult. I'm just glad to read the post script.

It was good to read that the hospital were trying to be as accommodating as possible of her choices- offering a choice of induction or c-section- offering the choice of c-section under GA. That to me shows that every effort was being made to respect her and help her feel in control where possible.

I don't know about the judgement. I'm torn. But I do believe reading that, that they really were trying to act in her best interests. It was noted that the mother very much wanted to have a healthy baby. If something had gone wrong, that would have also caused an unbearable amount of trauma for her.

I don't think there are easy answers. I just wish her and her baby the very best and am glad that it appears to have turned out well.