I am extremely disturbed by the case of the Utah woman who is being charged with murder after refusing to have a Cesarian Section performed. There are so many issues raised by this case, it's nearly mind-boggling. I received the following correspondence from a local home-birthing midwife (Corinne - I've included her note below as well).

Even considering the troubling facts of the case - the mother was possibly using drugs, was apparently mentally ill - should not cloud the underlying precedent that could be set: Pregnant women could be forced to undergo major abdominal surgery if their doctor even suggests it, under the threat of imprisonment. I delivered my daughter naturally, in a birth center, under the watchful eye of four midwives and my husband. If this woman is successfully convicted of murder, will I no longer have the option of delivering my future children naturally, in a comfortable, safe environment? What if the worst happens, and the baby dies? In addition to dealing with the tremendous grief, and likely overwhelming guilt (I feel guilty when Rhiannon skins her knee, for Pete's sake!), I could be charged with murder and be locked away from my family, from my child(ren)? This is NOT America.

**********************************
My dear friends,

Many of you have heard about the Utah woman, Melissa Ann Rowland, who is in jail under a charge of murder. Your families and friends are going to be discussing it, and I would like to provide you with the point of view of the birthing community, as there is much misinformation and wrong-thinking in the media at this time. I am going to send you two more emails, one is a summary of the position from the birthing community, and the other is a review of the legal issues from a professor of law.

My heart goes out to this woman. She did make some poor choices, such as using drugs, but she is still a person, and a grieving, wounded mother.

I am appalled and gravely concerned that many people in our country are happy to deny her (and by legal precedent, many more pregnant women) the same basic human rights every other American enjoys. You should be aware of the consequences of this and several other recent court cases. You are about to lose the right to "own" your own body, and you are about to lose "ownership" of your children.

Corrine

***********************************

Pastor Martin Niemoller,
Columbia Theological Seminary,
Decautur GA in 1959:

In Germany they first came for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.

Then they came for me —
and by that time no one was left to speak up.


************************************


Date: Sat Mar 13, 2004 12:10 pm
Subject: GNM 403014 C-section refusal leads to murder charge

Grassroots Network Message 403014
C-section refusal leads to murder charge

Dear Friends,

Some of you may have already heard about this sad and disturbing case in Utah: a woman who refused a recommended cesarean section for twins, subsequently one of the twins was stillborn, and the woman has been charged with murder.

The various details and circumstances of this case do not change the fact that this woman is being prosecuted for declining to follow the advice of doctors, or the fact that she is being charged with murder for the death of her unborn baby. After the fact, the doctors claim the baby would have lived had she agreed to the cesarean surgery when they first advised her to have one, which of course no one can predict with certainty.

Here are several links to newspaper articles in Utah papers. I hope you will read them. Together they are good examples of how the facts can be selectively reported and/or twisted, or a broader picture given when a reporter does a more careful and thorough job of researching a story.

Links:
From the Salt Lake Tribune:

Charge against W. Jordan mother creates legal challenge

Mother is charged in stillborn son's death

Rowland's case raises fundamental questions, ethicists, politicians warn

This case is important to understand for anyone who believes that women should be able to choose how, where and with whom to give birth. If a woman can be charged for murder for a stillbirth because she refused a cesarean section, what is to stop prosecutors from charging murder (or neglect or abuse) for a woman who chooses a home birth with a midwife, declining the technology and expertise of the hospital?

National Advocates for Pregnant Women (NAPW) is the organization that provided legal support for the South Carolina woman now in jail for the next eight years for the stillbirth of her baby (for those of you who are CfM Members, see "Legal Issues for Midwifery: Emerging Trends?" in the CfM News, Spring 2003; also find more information on the NAPW web site www.advocatesforpregnantwomen.org.) From the web site: "NAPW uses a variety of strategies, from litigation and public education to organizing on the local and national level, to ensure that," among other things, "Women do not lose their constitutional and human rights as a result of pregnancy." Please read NAPW's commentary, below, as it explains related cases and important issues for women and childbirth that this case brings up.

After you have read these articles and commentary, are you feeling like, "what can I do to help?" First and most important, take some time to understand this case and its implications for women and their babies, and for midwifery. If you read about this case in the newspaper, consider writing a letter to the editor that brings up some of these important considerations. Then, if you feel so moved, I'm sure that National Advocates for Pregnant Women could use some support, since it is a tax-exempt organization that depends on donations for its work.

Sincerely,

Susan Hodges, gatekeeper

**************************

Fri, 12 Mar 2004
NAPW Commentary on Murder Arrest of Pregnant Woman Who Refused a C-Section

An arrest in Utah yesterday of 28 year old Melissa Rowland who allegedly committed murder by refusing a recommended C-section represents a shocking abuse of state authority and a dangerous disregard for medical ethics.

In this case prosecutors claim that a woman pregnant with twins rejected advice of her physicians to have a cesarean section. Prosecutors assert that the stillbirth of one of the twins was caused by her refusal to undergo this surgery. According to the law, however, pregnant women, like other Americans have the right to decide whether or not to undergo surgery. The American Medical Association and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists as well other leading medical groups similarly conclude that the final decision must be the woman's.

These legal and medical "ethical principles" make sense for both women and children. Doctors are not infallible and their advice is just that, advice. Recently a woman went to a hospital in Pennsylvania ready to deliver her seventh child. For reasons that remain far from clear, the hospital decided she needed a c-section and when she refused they went to court. They asked for and won an order giving the hospital custody of the fetus before during and after delivery and the right to take custody of the pregnant woman and force her to have the cesarean surgery. She and her husband fled the hospital and delivered a perfectly health baby without surgery. Similar cases abound. In Georgia doctors got a court order claiming that without a c-section the baby had a 99% chance of dying and the woman a 50% chance of dying. The court granted the order, she fled and delivered a healthy baby vaginally. Neither women nor children are protected by a system that makes women flee from hospitals or subjects them to unnecessary surgery.

Angela Carder was not as lucky. Critically ill with a recurrence of cancer and 25 weeks pregnant, she, her family and attending physicians agreed to focus on prolonging her young life for as long as possible. The Hospital however sought a court order forcing her to have a c-section. Despite testimony that the surgery could kill her, the court concluded that the fetus had a right to life and ordered her to be cut open against her will. The surgery was performed: the fetus died within two hours and Angela died within two days with the c-section listed as a contributing factor. No one suggested arresting the doctor or hospital officials for murder, in that case arguably a double homicide.

Ayesha Madyun survived. She was forced to have a c-section based on the claim that she had been in labor too long and that her baby was at risk of dying from an infection. Her request to be allowed to wait longer before having the surgery so she could try natural delivery was portrayed to the court as an irrational religious objection to surgery. The court granted the order and after Ms. Madyun had been forcibly cut open they found that there was in fact no infection.

The ability to get a court order or threaten pregnant women with arrest has many negative consequences beyond denying pregnant women rights and performing unnecessary surgery that poses health risks to both the pregnant woman and fetus. In another Illinois case, doctors sought a court order for a forced c-section claiming the pregnant woman and her husband held irrational religious beliefs opposing all surgery. The doctors ran to the court instead of spending time with the patient. The court refused the order, the baby was delivered naturally, and it turned out that if the doctors had spent the time communicating with the patient and her family rather than judging them and rushing to court, they would have learned that it was misunderstanding not an absolute objection to surgery that made it appear that this couple was refusing a recommended (but unnecessary) c-section.

Today both the law and medicine agree that coerced medical interventions on pregnant women are an abuse of medical and state authority and that while pregnant women do not always make the right decision, in America, it is the person on whom the surgery is to be performed who gets to decide. In spite of this, Utah prosecutors apparently think that a pregnant woman who exercises her constitutional and common-law right to refuse medical advice can be arrested for murder. This is not only a clear misuse of the law, it is dangerous to children and fundamentally dehumanizing to pregnant women and their families.

Lynn M. Paltrow
Executive Director
National Advocates for Pregnant Women
153 Waverly Place, 6th Floor
New York, New York 10014
212-255-9252
917-921-7421
212-254-9679 (fax)
LMPNYC@a...
www.advocatesforpregnantwomen.org


===============================
SHARE WITH OTHERS IN YOUR AREA!
Feel free to forward the Grassroots Network messages to others who might be interested!

HOW TO JOIN THE GRASSROOTS NETWORK LIST
Visit the Citizens for Midwifery website at www.cfmidwifery.org. Scroll to the bottom of the page and enter your e-mail address. It's that simple!
================================

Today was a good day. I had some ladies over for a playdate this morning, and I would say that it was quite a success! Including me and Rhiannon, there were 4 moms and 6 kids, ranging in ages from 5 years to 17 months (Rhia was the youngest). She loved playing with the other kids, and I enjoyed chatting with some adults for a change.

This evening, I took Rhiannon over to Sandy's house while Dave and I went to have our taxes done (the only good part about that is that we're actually getting money back this year! woohoo!). Sandy reported that Jasper and Rhiannon were playing very well together, and that Jasper seemed to have gotten over some of his fear of her. Apparently, it was Rhiannon's exuberant shrieks of joy that would freak him out. Sandy discovered this while blowing bubbles with the kids. Eventually, Rhiannon won Jasper over to her way of thinking, and he too began to get more vocal. After that he would actually allow her to touch his hand, and even hug him! When I was there, he even initiated contact and gave Rhiannon a hug! This is major progress, since just two days ago while I was babysitting him, he would run for the door shrieking "Daddy! Daddy!" every time Rhiannon got too close to him. Now, to his credit, Rhiannon is a very physical person who has no concept of personal space, and the thought that someone might actually prefer that she not give them a hug has never entered her mind. But I'm happy to see that he's warming up to her.

All of that brings me to the purpose of this particular note. In speaking with Sandy, we got onto the subject of yelling. This is my parenting weak point. I try very hard to practice positive parenting (such as: don't say "no", speak politely, redirect, no spanking, say what to do instead of what not to do, etc.). However, I do snap and yell sometimes. My personal triggers are when Rhiannon screams and tugs at me, or kicks and fights and wrestles around while I'm trying to change her diaper - i.e., (to watch and listen to her), pour boiling hot tar on her tender skin. My patience runs out after saying "please lie still" or "please don't pull on Mama" for the umpteenth time, and I yell "Knock it off!", or some other bit of parenting wisdom. Anyway, Sandy mentioned that she had read an article recently that said that yelling was just as, if not more, damaging than hitting. She said that really got her attention, and she's been trying very hard not to yell at Jasper. She's also noticed that whenever she would yell at him, it was for something that was really her fault - she could have done something to avoid the situation in the first place.

I've been thinking a lot about this subject this past week. Last week was very difficult - Rhiannon wasn't feeling well, she was overtired and cranky (she hadn't been sleeping well due to a fever), and to top it off I had raging PMS. Dave and I had a discussion Saturday night because there was an overwhelming feeling of negativity in this house, and we needed to bring it up, air it out, and break the downward spiral we were in. We came up with a plan to disarm the negative triggers - if Rhiannon started to shriek and scream at me, I would put her in the bedroom (thereby designated "the screaming room") and tell her she could come out when she was done. If she kicked at me while changing her diaper, I would hold her legs and tell her that when she stopped, I would finish changing her, and we would be done. What a difference that has made this week! The difference is mainly in my attitude, but it has an amazing effect on Rhiannon's behavior. I really ought to read my own blog entries, because the Zen Parenting quote below is so totally right on, it's scary. So, this week things have been much more calm around here. When Rhiannon would start screaming at me, I would calmly tell her "Please go to the other room if you want to scream. Mama doesn't want to listen to it." I'd do this while pointing to the door, and she would actually stop!! A couple of times when she wouldn't stop right away, I picked her up and headed for the bedroom, and she was quiet before we ever got there. The amazing part about this approach is that I have never actually had to put her in the bedroom and leave! Diaper changes are still a bit hairy, but I've remained calm, and have held her knees down a few times, and she's now content to loudly protest the situation, but she doesn't phsyically fight me. That would bother me so much because I use cloth diapers, and I would just get the darn thing folded properly, and she would kick it apart before I could get it up over her bum, causing the misery to continue, and continue, and continue.

In A Word About Healthy Discipline, Michael J. Marshall, Ph.D. writes:

...discipline must begin with the parent. Parents must first learn to manage their own emotions in a disciplined manner by thinking, "How do I stand back and rationally assess the problem, think of possible solutions, and move to the next step without succumbing to the natural impulse to strike out in anger. Discipline begins with me. I need to act with self-control." Attempting to guide a child without learning alternatives to those reactions copied blindly from one's own childhood, is destined to fail.

Raising a child is the most difficult and demanding task any of us will ever undertake. To do so without self-discipline, self-understanding, and knowledge of child development, but by merely relying on old habits and impulses, is like jumping out of an airplane and saying "I'll figure out how to work the parachute on my way down."
more

So true. I honestly don't understand those parents who never attempt to educate themselves on parenting issues. As parents, we are shaping another human being. Our actions, our successes and failures, will have a deep and everlasting effect on our children. What arrogance to assume to know how to do it properly! We have to take classes, practice, and pass exams in order to drive a car, but absolutely no training is required to raise a child. I suppose that is one of the perks of being a parent; you get exclusive rights to decide how to raise your family. (I could go on another tangent here about meddling in-laws who disagree with what I believe about parenting Rhiannon, but I will save that for another day.)

One final thought that's been running through my head about this whole issue - one of those little Nuggets of Wisdom that has been around forever:
The only person you can control is yourself.
This is absolutely true as well. To attempt to control another person, even your own child, is futile, and will only cause frustration, at best.

My aunt sent me a great email with a thought to ponder. And ponder it I have. Here are the results of those ponderings, as well as the original impetus. Accompanying the email was an image of a beautiful little girl with a look of unadulterated joy on her face, wearing a lovely pair of fairy wings.

Mine Infant-Ey
Abov the Sky
Discerning endless Space,
Did make me see
Two Sights in me,
Three Eys adorn'd my Face:
Two Luminaries in my Flesh
Did me refresh;
But one did lurk within,
Beneath my Skin,
That was of greater Worth than both the other;
For those were Twins; but this had ne'r a Brother.

Thomas Traherne (1637 - 1674) English poet, mystic

*********
Recalling his childhood, Traherne wrote: "My knowledge was Divine. I knew by intuition those things which since my Apostasy, I collected again by the highest reason" ( Centuries , III, 2). This inner sensitivity is the subject of the poem "Sight"

*********
a·pos·ta·sy P Pronunciation Key ( -p st-s )
n. pl. a·pos·ta·sies
Abandonment of one's religious faith, a political party, one's principles, or a cause.

*********
The child in the photograph is named Tahlia. She is one year old and lives in Australia. She visited her grandmother who lives in Dural Northwest of Sydney, and who took this photo and sent it to me. It is late summer there now. It is amazing to me that this poem was written during a time of life on Earth when hundreds of people were executed as witches, and here is someone who lived then, but had such great sensitivity to percepton that he wrote this poem, certainly demonstrating the antithesis of a mentality that could act to execute someone for being different. It is amazing to me that such diverse consciousness could exist in the same world side by side at the same time. Then when I look at Tahlia's face, I just realize the same situation exists today, and I wonder if the world has made any progress in the past several hundred years. Even though I feel unsure regarding the answer to that question, it seems that clues reside in the expression on her face.
(I believe the author of this is Marcia Anne Sobota)

And, from my aunt:
Jodi,
wow.
who does this remind you of, and what about the accompanying text?
It occurs to me that perhaps part of what we search out in fey magic is something beyond faith, even larger than hope... a divinity of experience, of knowing which we lose in "growing up" and have effortless connection to in childhood.
love you ,
ROZ

I wept after reading this. Sincerely. It touched me to the very fiber of my being. It brought to the surface feelings that I've only caught fleeting glimpses of ever since Rhiannon was born, but I hadn't the strength or desire to look at fully. A feeling would bubble up, my heart would swell, I would get a catch in my throat, and push it down again. Mostly this would happen when Rhiannon's face would catch the light in a certain way, and I would see myself, as a child, in her. However, this email, this thought, stripped it naked and held my face to it so I could not look away, so that I could scarcely breathe. You see, I've never actually thought of myself as a child, of ever being one. I've never "been in touch with my inner child" so to speak. My childhood was taken from me - the child that was me was robbed of innocence, violated, used and tossed aside.

When I look at my daughter, the feeling that she holds something precious inside of her is palpable. I want to protect that, nourish it, and let it last as long as possible. I want to treat her gently, so that she maintains that effortless connection to divinity, to a belief in magic, until the "growing up" can no longer be held off and she absolutely must let it go.

My childhood, this connection to the divine, this most precious gift that all children have and should be held dear by those adults given charge to protect it, was gone before I even knew what it was that was lost. Now I know - when I look at my daughter, I can feel it. Yes, I think Roz is right - in searching out fey magic, in believing in intangibles, I am attempting to regain a connection that was lost. Perhaps, if I am truly fortunate and allow myself to be guided by my greatest teacher, my daughter... perhaps I will fully heal, and regain this "divinity of experience" that was lost in the prematurity of my own growing up.

Rhiannon is the greatest magic, the closest connection I have ever had to the divine, and perhaps the greatest healer as well.