being a woman of childbearing years is going to be intolerable in the US.

is the same as refusing treatment?

You cannot be forced to even donate blood should someone be bleeding out right in front of you. Even if you were the only, rarest match, you cannot be forced to donate a kidney to your own child. Even if you die, and your child is dying right beside your corpse in the OR, they cannot remove any of your organs without permission to save your child.

But pregnant women are so much the incubators and less the human beings than you that you would allow them to be forced to have surgery to save someone not yet born? I call that monstrous.

Thank you.

such as Shakesville, Tumblr posts and the like, even if the wording is mine. But yes, it is remarkable how many think women don't deserve bodily autonomy, even on a progressive message board.

except in the case of pregnant women. Funny thing, that...

I did point it out to them earlier, but they haven't had a time to respond...

It is absolutely intolerable that they talk about how women and people with uteri should sacrifice themselves for viable fetuses, when they aren't interested in making organ donation obligatory. In fact, many, many more die because they do not find donated organs in time than ever die as fetuses because the person who carries them deliberately prioritizes their own life over that of the fetus, which is their full right.

a C-section is a MAJOR surgery with huge risks and even when it goes well, there are long term consequences. A woman gets to choose what happens to her body...she is not a vessel for a fetus.

Yet it seems like even some on DU aren't fully on board with it.

Seeing as laws regulating abortion already take fetal viability into consideration to some extent, and the women in the OP are in labor, hours from delivery at that point.

Though as I wrote that, I remembered Bill Hick's comedy sketch about abortion:

"It's not a person until it's in my phonebook!"

It means putting the welfare of a fetus over the welfare of the woman. This is very different from refusing to treat an individual person.

I realize you don't think that is different. But, it is legally and ethically.

Yes people can be stupid and it could cost them their lives ( or in utero baby), but it is their choice.
This may sound heartless but forcing a patient against their will must stop and now.
The ramifications in allowing this to continue and expand (and it will)are frightening.

Very scary that women are being forced to endure any surgery against their will. It is hard to imagine that judges actually rule this way.

With child endangerment for refusing medical treatment for their child?

and the mother's body is what is being cut into against her will.

This can potentially open up a huge can of worms. What if a pregnant woman refuses fetal surgery, or bed rest, or some medication, or prescribed prenatal vitamins...? Where do you draw the line? Either pregnant women have sovereignty over their own bodies, or they don't.

until it's out of the mother's body.

when they're choosing medical treatment for their living children.

Generally these cases where there's a dispute are medically complicated, and there's a disagreement about weighing risks to the mother against risks to the child. They're not cases where the woman is refusing a section for for no reason.

Was God telling her that she needs to just pray for a healthy child so she opted to forgo medical intervention to save the child? I am going to guess it was not for religious reasons because if it were then I think the story would have read differently, since she would have been labeled a crazy fundie who rejected science and killed her baby.

Some women die from c-section complications, and some babies die from doctor incompetence. Let's do murder charges in those cases as well.

but when I had my one child, it was a choice of either a c-section or death. I am a small person. My wheelbase is too narrow for a normal delivery. The doctor and I both knew beforehand so that was a real easy decision.

But I don't know about this case. Sounds like we need more facts, like would the child have probably been stillborn anyway?

If I had refused a C-section I would be dead and so would my child. Sometimes it's that clear cut, and sometimes it's not that clear cut, the need for a C-section.

assault charges be filed against the doctor.

and she refuses a C-section? Is the dr. under any obligation to do an emergency c-section to save her life? If he/she lets her die because she refused surgery, is he/she exept from malpractice claims?

Just sign a form saying you're making the choice on your own, against medical advice, and that's it.

You really didn't know this?

Same as any other procedure.

Some of the replies in this thread are just crazy. What happens to, or inside, a woman's body is her own choice to make. Same thing goes for men. No one else should have the power to make such life or death decisions for other people. If I don't have control over my own body, then what do I have?

Because the first time this goes to the Supreme Court, it will be ruled unconstitutional. Even with the current Gang Of Idiots.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]“If you're not committed to anything, you're just taking up space.”
Gregory Peck, Mirage (1965)[/center][/font][hr]

If a doctor is 95% sure that a c-section is necessary to save the life of the mother and / or baby, should that doctor be forced to participate in at least one person's death? Do doctors have the right to not take part in killing someone? Sure, there's legal liability, but the doctors also have to live with the outcome.