WOW, this is some scary shit.
this post at The New York Times' parenting blog "Motherlode" (which i just discovered!) is crazy... they raise the question of whether refusing to follow a doctor's orders while pregnant should be a crime, and cite what i see as a horrifying example that sets a very scary precedent: the case of a woman who was literally held prisoner in a hospital after refusing to stay on bedrest while trying to raise two toddlers, AND her requests for transfer to another facility for a second opinion were REFUSED.
thoughts??
http://parenting.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/12/is-refusing-bed-rest-a-cri...
- miss phoenix's blog
- Login or register to post comments
I just read that, too. I'm horrified.
At least not in the States. 
Hey what if a bunch of women just started refusing to have babies..... like all women....eh......
We'd prolly just be forcibly inseminated unless we left for Mars or some shit.
I LOVE BABIES. Love, babies.
And don't kid yourselves- it's a trend in the united states. Don't worry ladies- soon enough your fetus will have more right to live than you do. In some states they already do.
So in florida, my bitchy doctor could have me forcibly hospitalized to watch my weight gain and force me to do the sugar shock test, even though my totally awesome midwives assure me that they don't even think my weight gain is excessive.
fuck that noise.
Tigerfish Mama
i have one thought:
new york times will not publish your viewpoint on this, if you comment and you disagree. they mine their comments, keeping divergent ones under a certain percentage.
the idea of this "crime" sounds a lot like the "fetal personhood" laws.
The article/blog entry was much more from the standpoint of "isn't this appalling", and extensively quoted someone making the slippery slope argument. The comments that I read (first 10 or so) were all appropriately concerned with a) the lack of evidence that being on bedrest will improve the course of an at-risk pregnancy, b) reproductive rights are being challenged with this case, and it is scary and wrong if it's upheld.
i don't think you misrepresented anything, i just wanted to make note of the fact that New york times does censor comments. i'll read it probably this weekend and will likely have more relevant input on it.
Did you see this comment?? I like to think people don't actually think this way, but maybe they do, or maybe they're just trying to be inflammatory.
"This is how we'll lose to China. Chinese women are required to have pre-pregnancy examination to catch genetic transferable diseases.
This woman that A.C.L.U. is trying to protect is a hallmark of bad mother and the future of this country. Smoking with 2 kids in the house and pregnant with what can only be described as degenerated baby."
YIKES.
Thanks for sharing the post; I'm officially frightened. I'm glad I don't live in that town anymore!
"Thou shalt not" might reach the head, but it takes "Once upon a time..." to reach the heart. -Philip Pullman
Navigation
Who's online
Who's New
- BeachBunny
- gayle.mallinger
- Mamapocket
- mjcwriter
- addie smith
looking back at the way i phrased this post i accidentally made it sound like the NYT Motherlode supports that it should be a crime to refuse to follow drs orders while pregnant, but the post is actually written from the point of view that it's fucked up and wrong to hold a mother prisoner in a hospital to force her to stay on bedrest. i meant "this is some scary shit" about the woman that happened to, not the blog's view on it! my bad with phrasing, oops.