After reading the article, it appears to me that the docs initially missed the mother's having a dangerous infection.
I don't know anything about Irish law or medicine (except orthopedic surgery):
Some questions:
1) To what extend did the refusal to abort affect the outcome?
2) Is to be in the process of miscarrying not sufficient justification for an abortion?
3) How risky to the mother's life must a pregnancy be in order to justify an abortion?
4) Does the existence of a fetal heartbeat make the answers to #2 & #3 irrelevant?
5) If yest to #4, wouldn't this make saving the mother's life irrelevant?
6) Were the docs disobeying the law for personal religious reasons?
It certainly warrants an investigation of the docs.
I hope hubby gets a punishingly big settlement.
With spontaneous abortions/miscarriages (ie not ones planned for by parents), people dont arrive at hospital saying that’s what’s wrong, its usually something like vaginal bleeding, or in her case back pain (which is slightly ambiguous and often there for totally benign reasons)
However after going in, she would have/should have had basic checks done through a history and exam. As ive mentioned your diagnosis will vary based on whats found. This article uses the wording '
was found to be miscarrying', which suggests to me she was having whats called an inevitable abortion/miscarriage. Thats defined by the cervical os being open during pregnancy. At such a point, there is absolutely no point of return to the pregnancy, its simply a matter of time till the body passes it.
(just for reference other classifications of abortions/miscarriages are,
threatened abortion -which is just the symptoms such as bleeding, but baby is intact, alive and cervix still closed on examination,
missed - baby is dead in womb but cervix is still closed,
incomplete - some products passed but not all, and
complete -the whole of the pregnancy has already been passed when they're examined) All have different management.
So to answer 1. leaving someone in a state of inevitable abortion both raises the risk of serious infection and risk of life threatening bleeding. With the baby below viability, it has no chance to survive, making intervention warranted to protect the mother. Refusal and the delay i think is directly related to her death from septicaemia.
2. threatened abortion is not to be terminated, but the ones that go past the point of no return generally should. Again it will rely on clinical judgment how best to manage any 1 individual, such that an inevitable abortion thats very early on in the pregnancy might not need medical/surgical intervention, but just allow it to pass naturally.
3. clinical judgment really defines this. But in this example, the examination findings will have ruled out this pregnancy from ever succeeding, (if the cervix was open) making deliberation over the baby vs mother's interests obsolete as the baby is destined to die.
4. i would think that the presence of a heartbeat simply shows its not a missed miscarriage. (dead baby closed cervix) but if the cervix is open, then heartbeat or not, the pregnancy is going to end prematurely. With a non viable fetus by dates, (too early) theres no hope the baby can live.
6. i cant speak for Ireland, but im pretty sure it doesnt fly in the rest of the uk. The reference to '
this is a catholic country' by the doctor counts towards professional negligence whereby they departed from their duty to the patient (the mother) and her wellbeing above all else.
Perhaps this may be just the wake up call some people need there.
