Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mother has 13 children in care and is pregnant with 14th

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by BroomJockey View Post
    Right. And the lawyer went to med school... when? If you're prosecuting a doctor for doing something medically unnecessary, you still need a doctor on the stand to actually say that it was. Otherwise, there's no proof, unless you have the doctor on tape saying "I must stop this woman. I'm going to remove her uterus, and make it look necessary!"
    Lawyers buy expert testimony all the time. That wouldn't be a problem. You seem to be supposing a whole conspiracy, and those rarely stay secret. Not every doctor want's to cover up such horrible assault. Some have little things called consciences.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Flyndaran View Post
      You seem to be supposing a whole conspiracy,
      Not really. Studied self-interest. Any doctor who gives up another in court will have it reciprocated if he ever fucks up. They all stick together, no one gets dinged.
      Any comment I make should not be taken as an absolute, unless I say it should be. Even this one.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by BroomJockey View Post
        Not really. Studied self-interest. Any doctor who gives up another in court will have it reciprocated if he ever fucks up. They all stick together, no one gets dinged.
        I doubt they would stick together that much for willful crimes. Mistakes maybe, but crimes? I doubt it. It would take eveyrone involved from doctor down to orderly to keep quiet about it.
        I may have a hint more faith in people than you... which is something I never thought I would say.

        Comment


        • #34
          plus it's not like they keep removed organs around for years-they're incinerated as medical waste(though I really wanted to keep my tonsils)-all he'd have to say is "she was bleeding out the only way to save her life was to remove her uterus*"-how do you disprove that? You can't-women lose a lot of blood during childbirth.


          *if the uterus doesn't "firm up" within a certain timeframe after giving birth you can die from the resulting hemorrhaging.
          Registered rider scenic shore 150 charity ride

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by BlaqueKatt View Post
            plus it's not like they keep removed organs around for years-they're incinerated as medical waste(though I really wanted to keep my tonsils)-all he'd have to say is "she was bleeding out the only way to save her life was to remove her uterus*"-how do you disprove that? You can't-women lose a lot of blood during childbirth.


            *if the uterus doesn't "firm up" within a certain timeframe after giving birth you can die from the resulting hemorrhaging.
            That does make me remember how hysterectomies used be disgustingly common. That particular operation is given much more scrutiny now a days.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Flyndaran View Post
              What, you don't think people in wheelchairs should be allowed to keep their children?
              I think that if you make an effort the keep up then there isn't any problem. Many times people in wheelchairs also have a support base of friends and family to help out. I have also seen people in wheelchairs move fast when they wanted to.

              My concern is that she is disabled and now wants to have child 14 when all previous 13 have been taken away. I also wonder if if she is physically capable of carrying this child full term.
              "Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe" -H. G. Wells

              "Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed" -Sir Francis Bacon

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Flyndaran View Post
                That does make me remember how hysterectomies used be disgustingly common. That particular operation is given much more scrutiny now a days.
                Bwah? I never thought hysterectomies were common...I think it's pretty standard for doctors NOT to sterilize young women, even if they want it with all their heart and soul!

                In my entire 27 years on this earth, I've only met 1 woman who told me she's had a hysterectomy...and she had some serious issues that led to that. I know other women with terrible reproductive health problems who still don't have their organs removed. They are on birth control, different medications, or seek alternative medicines to help ease their pain/other symptoms.

                Couples I know of who wanted to stop having children after a certain point...always the man got snipped. The women didn't get tubes tied or things removed.

                I guess anecdote doesn't equal evidence...but still....
                "Children are our future" -LaceNeilSinger
                "And that future is fucked...with a capital F" -AmethystHunter

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by DesignFox View Post
                  I guess anecdote doesn't equal evidence...but still....
                  I never knew of hysterectomies being common. Now, Mom had to have bladder surgery and since she a) had gone through menopause and b) is a breast cancer survivor, and therefore prone to uterine cancer, the surgeon basically did a hysterectomy at the same time. He would've had to move the uterus out of the way anyway, so, with Mom's permission, he just cut it out.

                  Now, I'm generally not a fan of prophylactic masectomies/hysterectomies. And a doctor 'accidentally' tying a woman's tubes because she is an irresponsible mother is....well, that's very fuzzy moral ground. Frankly, the doctor's not the one to make that decision.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Hysterectomies were too common in the 70s and 80s. Maybe a bit before most posters' times. That is in relation to how many were really necessary, so common is relative.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compuls...#United_States

                      Sterilization of some sort was also common in the beginning of the century, although it doesn't say what method was used for females.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by anriana View Post
                        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compuls...#United_States

                        Sterilization of some sort was also common in the beginning of the century, although it doesn't say what method was used for females.
                        That too, but I meant the simple lack of caring that caused doctors to do the simpler thing of total organ removal rather than something that actually took skill and time.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Flyndaran View Post
                          the simpler thing of total organ removal rather than something that actually took skill and time.
                          Yeah. I mean, just the other day, I took out my own pancreas. Thing was just slowing me down. Snip and a bit of sewing and I was fine. Dunno what they need all that schoolin' for just to take out an organ. I keeed, I keeed.
                          Any comment I make should not be taken as an absolute, unless I say it should be. Even this one.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by BroomJockey View Post
                            Yeah. I mean, just the other day, I took out my own pancreas. Thing was just slowing me down. Snip and a bit of sewing and I was fine. Dunno what they need all that schoolin' for just to take out an organ. I keeed, I keeed.
                            Ooh, caught me in a hyperbole. That is a bad habit of mine. If I've said it once, I've said it a million... there I go again.

                            But it is much easier to remove cats' uteruses and ovaries than "tying" their tubes.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Flyndaran View Post
                              But it is much easier to remove cats' uteruses and ovaries than "tying" their tubes.
                              If they still have their ovaries they still go into heat.

                              There was a time that some doctors sterilized poor African-American women after they gave birth without consent from the women. It was rare but it did happen.
                              "Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe" -H. G. Wells

                              "Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed" -Sir Francis Bacon

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by tabbyblack13 View Post
                                If they still have their ovaries they still go into heat.
                                ...
                                Yeah, but who uses the word "oophorectomy"?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X