• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Catholic hospital 'risked woman's life by forcing her to deliver 18-week fetus[W:465]

RogueWarrior

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 12, 2013
Messages
4,579
Reaction score
6,097
Location
Atheist Utopia aka Reality
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Tamesha Means lawsuit: Catholic hospital 'forced miscarrying woman to deliver 18-week fetus' | Mail Online

[h=1]Catholic hospital 'risked woman's life by forcing her to deliver 18-week fetus that had no chance of survival' because of no abortion policy.[/h]
  • Tamesha Means, 30, of Muskegon, Michigan, filed a lawsuit Friday against the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops
  • It claims Means, then 27 and a mother-of-two, visited the hospital - the only one in her county - three times after her water broke five months early
  • She says she was told to go home before she miscarried on the third visit and was forced to deliver the 18 week fetus feet-first


Shades of the debacle in Ireland where the woman died.

Mercy Health Partners is part of Trinity Health, a Catholic-run medical group that prohibits abortion in its hospitals.

I don't know why people are all flustered about the possible imposition of sharia law when there is a christian version just as bad and already in place.
 
Tamesha Means lawsuit: Catholic hospital 'forced miscarrying woman to deliver 18-week fetus' | Mail Online

[h=1]Catholic hospital 'risked woman's life by forcing her to deliver 18-week fetus that had no chance of survival' because of no abortion policy.[/h]
  • Tamesha Means, 30, of Muskegon, Michigan, filed a lawsuit Friday against the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops
  • It claims Means, then 27 and a mother-of-two, visited the hospital - the only one in her county - three times after her water broke five months early
  • She says she was told to go home before she miscarried on the third visit and was forced to deliver the 18 week fetus feet-first


Shades of the debacle in Ireland where the woman died.



I don't know why people are all flustered about the possible imposition of sharia law when there is a christian version just as bad and already in place.

Go to a different hospital. If she had time to go to the same one 3 times, she had time to go elsewheres.
 
There is more to this story. They would have probably transfered her by ambulance or at least told her to go to the nearest hospital. Fishy story.
 
Go to a different hospital. If she had time to go to the same one 3 times, she had time to go elsewheres.

Wow Really?
They never told her that the was no chance the fetus would survive. If they had told her that and that their policy is no abortions, she could have made that choice. The doctors have an obligation to her first and foremost. Do no harm and they almost killed her.
 
There is more to this story. They would have probably transfered her by ambulance or at least told her to go to the nearest hospital. Fishy story.

They sent her home 3 times! I don't think their rules even allow them to transfer a patient for an abortion and they never told her she should have an abortion in the first place!!!!!!
 
I forgot about this but...My wife did clinicals at a Catholic hospital and was talking to a patient that I cant remember the exact story, but had some sort of problem with pregnancy that recommending birth contorl would have generally been good advice. My wife had to finish clinicals somewhere else, they threw her out. I look forward to finding out more in this thread.
They sent her home 3 times! I don't think their rules even allow them to transfer a patient for an abortion and they never told her she should have an abortion in the first place!!!!!!
 
I forgot about this but...My wife did clinicals at a Catholic hospital and was talking to a patient that I cant remember the exact story, but had some sort of problem with pregnancy that recommending birth contorl would have generally been good advice. My wife had to finish clinicals somewhere else, they threw her out. I look forward to finding out more in this thread.

and yet you liked Fisher's reply. I am confused. Did anyone actually read the article or do you respond based on the headline only?:doh
 
maybe I have misunderstood about this like thing. I "like" peoples posts for many reasons other than I completely agree with them. But in this case she should have gone to a different hospital. I read it again, what am I missing?
and yet you liked Fisher's reply. I am confused. Did anyone actually read the article or do you respond based on the headline only?:doh
 
maybe I have misunderstood about this like thing. I "like" peoples posts for many reasons other than I completely agree with them. But in this case she should have gone to a different hospital. I read it again, what am I missing?

Why would she go to another hospital?

She went to the hospital. They didn't tell her that her life was in danger. They didn't tell her that the safest thing to do was to abort the fetus. They examined her. They gave her medicine.

What reason would she have to go somewhere else?
 
Her water broke, she should know...OB aint my thing but I would know to get a second opinion.
Why would she go to another hospital?

She went to the hospital. They didn't tell her that her life was in danger. They didn't tell her that the safest thing to do was to abort the fetus. They examined her. They gave her medicine.

What reason would she have to go somewhere else?
 
Her water broke, she should know...OB aint my thing but I would know to get a second opinion.

Ahh, I see! Even though the doctors did not give her any indication that she should see someone else, she should have assumed she knew better than the doctors!! :roll:
 
I mentioned something about Catholic Hospitals withholding some information in #6, it just sounds to horrendous to beleive without a little skepticism.
Ahh, I see! Even though the doctors did not give her any indication that she should see someone else, she should have assumed she knew better than the doctors!! :roll:
 
Wow Really?
They never told her that the was no chance the fetus would survive. If they had told her that and that their policy is no abortions, she could have made that choice. The doctors have an obligation to her first and foremost. Do no harm and they almost killed her.

She had two other kids so she knew that when her water broke and she went the first time that there was no turning back. So wow, yes, really. The doctors do not have an obligation to do whatever she tells them to do. She wanted an abortion and did not get one. That she had to deliver the baby would not have changed anything about the situation other than the she had to confront it.
 
Everyone seems to be missing the fact that this hospital was the only hospital in her entire county. I'm sure someone will decide that she *should* have driven how ever many miles it took to go to another hospital in another county (even though many public hospitals require people to be a resident of the county), and if she didn't have a car she *should* have hopped on a bus for XX number of hours with her water running down her leg and labor pains starting, and if there was no bus service available she *should* have simply gone home like the hospital said and waited for god to either (a) deliver her stillborn child or (b) kill them both.

Bottom line, this hospital violated the sanctity of the "do no harm" premise by refusing to properly care for a woman who was in obvious distress, and not making arrangements for her to get the care she so desperately needed when they themselves refused to provide it. There's no freaking excuse for this. None.
 
If a hospital cannot keep all its medical options open then it's not fit to practice medicine.

There should only be one standard for hospitals. A "Catholic" hospital is likely not practicing proper medicine as defined by the College of Physicians.
 
Everyone seems to be missing the fact that this hospital was the only hospital in her entire county. I'm sure someone will decide that she *should* have driven how ever many miles it took to go to another hospital in another county (even though many public hospitals require people to be a resident of the county), and if she didn't have a car she *should* have hopped on a bus for XX number of hours with her water running down her leg and labor pains starting, and if there was no bus service available she *should* have simply gone home like the hospital said and waited for god to either (a) deliver her stillborn child or (b) kill them both.

Bottom line, this hospital violated the sanctity of the "do no harm" premise by refusing to properly care for a woman who was in obvious distress, and not making arrangements for her to get the care she so desperately needed when they themselves refused to provide it. There's no freaking excuse for this. None.

I checked a little and it seems that some of her other hospital choice are run by the same folks using the same guidelines.

A hospital should provide equal care for everyone. That does not mean that the staff should be forced to do things against their beliefs. However, I emphatically state that nobody should be forced to do things against their beliefs.
A doctor or nurse or other personnel can refuse to do procedures if they feel their faith forbids them.
But a hospital, especially the only one in a county, should be prepared to treat everyone. They should have enough staff prepared to handle any procedure.

Hospitals, like schools and government, should be secular. Treatment should be secular.
 
Practitioners and institutions can have their values and no one should take that away from them, I'd like to hear from her physician in order to have a fair judgement on the case.
 
3 years to file suit? Smells like BS to me...
 
She had two other kids so she knew that when her water broke and she went the first time that there was no turning back. So wow, yes, really. The doctors do not have an obligation to do whatever she tells them to do. She wanted an abortion and did not get one. That she had to deliver the baby would not have changed anything about the situation other than the she had to confront it.

I agree that the Dr's do not have an obligation to do what she says, but they do have the obligation to inform her of the danger she is in.
 
I agree that the Dr's do not have an obligation to do what she says, but they do have the obligation to inform her of the danger she is in.

She is suing them because they wouldn't giver her an abortion and that they didn't tell her that the baby wouldn't survive? Do you not see an obvious conflict between her positions? Do you think the baby would have survived the abortion? Do you think she didn't know what was going on after having had two kids that her water broke 5 months early?

She is looking for a lottery ticket.
 
She is suing them because they wouldn't giver her an abortion and that they didn't tell her that the baby wouldn't survive? Do you not see an obvious conflict between her positions? Do you think the baby would have survived the abortion? Do you think she didn't know what was going on after having had two kids that her water broke 5 months early?

She is looking for a lottery ticket.

I agree with you that she is looking for a lottery ticket. I won't dispute that at all. All I am saying is that the hospital/Dr/nurse whomever should have informed her as to what was happening and the danger she was in. Which according to her they didnt.
 
Religion and medical science cannot be combined. When it is forced together under one institution, these are the results. And there are many other stories with similar circumstances like the OP. The sad part is that this woman had no other options. I guess she should have moved-
 
Accprding to the ACLU lawsuit she is suing them because they did not inform her that continuing the pregnancy posed significant risks to her health. She deleveloped a life threating infection and when the hospital discovered the infection they were still going to send her back home without telling her.

Tamesha rushed to Mercy Health Partners in Muskegon, Michigan, when her water broke after only 18 weeks of pregnancy. Based on the bishops' religious directives, the hospital sent her home twice even though Tamesha was in excruciating pain; there was virtually no chance that her pregnancy could survive, and continuing the pregnancy posed significant risks to her health.

Because of its Catholic affiliation and binding directives, the hospital told Tamesha that there was nothing it could do and did not tell Tamesha that terminating her pregnancy was an option and the safest course for her condition. When Tamesha returned to the hospital a third time in extreme distress and with an infection, the hospital once again prepared to send her home. While staff prepared her discharge paperwork, she began to deliver. Only then did the hospital begin tending to Tamesha's miscarriage.

The directives prohibit a pre-viability pregnancy termination, even when there is little or no chance that the fetus will survive, and the life or health of a pregnant woman is at risk.

They also direct health care providers not to inform patients about alternatives inconsistent with those directives even when those alternatives are the best option for the patient's health.

The lawsuit charges that, because of the directives, the USCCB is ultimately responsible for the unnecessary trauma and harm that Tamesha and other pregnant women in similar situations have experienced at Catholic-sponsored hospitals.

Additional Resources

Tamesha’s story is not unique to learn more about other women impacted by the Ethical and Religious Directives. Learn More:

Religious Hospitals and Primary Care Physicians: Conflicts over Policies for Patient Care, Journal of General Internal Medicine
Below The Radar: Religious Refusals to Treat Pregnancy Complications Put Women in Danger, National Women’s Law Center

read more:

https://www.aclu.org/reproductive-f...s-v-united-states-conference-catholic-bishops
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom