twitter facebook stumble upon rss

Mom Refuses C-Section, Baby Taken Away

sign up for the momlogic newsletter Tweet This

Wow, we just can't believe this.

newborn baby in hospital

A woman in New Jersey refused to consent to a C-section during labor in the event that her baby was in distress. She ended up giving birth vaginally without incident. The baby was in good medical condition.

However, her baby was taken away from her and her parental rights were terminated because she "abused and neglected her child" by refusing the C-section and behaving "erratically" while in labor.

How is this legal?

A New Jersey appellate court has upheld the shocking ruling, and custody has been given to the child's foster parents.

The court's decision cites hospital records that describe the mother, V.M., as "combative," "uncooperative," "erratic," "noncompliant," "irrational" and "inappropriate." That's how we acted during labor, too ... but our babies weren't taken away, thank God.

The court opinion also focuses on the fact that the mother had been in psychiatric care for twelve years prior to the birth. But, as the Huffington Post points out, her psychiatric state would never have been questioned if the mother had not refused invasive abdominal surgery -- which was entirely within her rights.

Read the entire court ruling here.

Do you think this woman's baby should have been taken away? Comment below.


next: Cat Cora Welcomes a Baby Boy
189 comments so far | Post a comment now
MomC July 28, 2009, 7:42 AM

Thanks to many of you for clarifying the court papers without me having to read them. I find these articles with inflammatory headlines are quite common on MomLogic, and with that said, I am terminating my subscription.

disgusted July 28, 2009, 7:49 AM

This story makes me ill. She could have legally aborted, but choosing to have this baby the way God intended resulted in the state stepping in and taking her child??? This is simply criminal.

shock July 28, 2009, 8:00 AM

Are you all kidding me!!!!! she is 18 and has 4 KIDS …. did you read that!!

Anonymous July 28, 2009, 8:01 AM

The mom’s decision caused the baby no harm, yet the state denies that child bonding and breastmilk. I ask you, which decision is causing this baby harm??

Horrified July 28, 2009, 8:14 AM

That is pure crazy…. We all act in that manner during labor.. it is just natural.. I had seizures during labor maybe they should take my children away… I mean what is this world coming to… We as woman are getting put back to times before woman’s movement for rights.. and well I myself won’t stand for it… It is our bodies and we are well within our rights to refuse any treatment and/or surgery at anytime for any reason… I say she needs to fight it all the way…

Robyn July 28, 2009, 8:45 AM

OMG I wonder if I was more coherent during my labor and asked more questions about what was going on and denied a c-section would they have taken my son away…That is just stupid like they have nothing better to do. They are so many other crimes that the court can spend their time on.

Marcy July 28, 2009, 9:13 AM

Anyone who reads the court ruling documentation can see that it’s obvious 43yo the mother has some psychological issues but the first psychiatrist deemed that the was not psychotic. The refusal of a CS should not have been a part of the judges decision to revoke her parental rights. It goes against everything we women and mothers have fought against for so long. The sad thing is that if she’d had good prenatal care and just stayed home to deliver none of this would have ever happened. Where was the OB/MW she saw throughout her pregnancy? Did she even have one?

Scorpio July 28, 2009, 9:23 AM


wow! That’s unconstitutional,that should have never happened,the mother made the best choice and the child came out just fine,take my advice,she should call up oprah winfrey and air it live and contact president obama,god bless the mother,and I wish her well and hope that all turns out in the good for her and her child to be reunited together.

carmen July 28, 2009, 9:41 AM

Sorry…but here is my take on this. 18 and 4 kids????? Unless she is seriously working and supporting those kids…thats just ridiculous. I think that yes, while under duress in labor, your not thinking straight, and that it was crappy the court only stepped in then and NOT after the first kid and knowing she has mental problems. Lets let her have 5 kids, let the people support them and then lets get her on something stupid like this — Its like that woman that ate and mutilated her 3 week old the other day..history of mental illness, yet lets let her continue to have kids and then seriously act outraged when these unfit mothers do something horrible.

Matt July 28, 2009, 9:45 AM

Kara’s post is very revealing in that the C-Section refusal doesn’t matter in the case. I’m unfamiliar with the Huffington Post, but I know there’s quite a few conservative internet web sites that I’ve had bones to pick with before, so I looked up the question and pretty much everyone says Huffington Post is pretty liberal which surprised me in this case. Looks like someone was in a hurry and didn’t really read or understand the linked court case report.

Melinda July 28, 2009, 9:47 AM

The mom in this story is not only suffering from a schizophrenic disorder that she refuses to have treatment for, but she also purgered herself in front of the court by denying the fact that she refused to sign the waiver to begin with. It is the mom’s interpretation that a psychiatric doctor was called in to deal with the behavior of the hospital staff! She is insane and her daughter should have the right to be raised by sane parents.

PattiH July 28, 2009, 9:52 AM

Oh just go and read the court papers! There was absolutely no need for this headline. The refusal of the c-section was only being mentioned in conjunction with her later denial of the entire incident, AND the judge even mentioned that it was not necessary in order to find the woman an unfit mother.

It’s a case of mental illness, not medical procedures!

jet July 28, 2009, 10:00 AM

The persons involved in this decision should be formally charged with misutilization of a minor and child abuse. A lawyer should be hired for the child by the mother and they should sue the state of New Jersey. This is clear denial of civil and human rights for both the mother and child involved. Go federal and you will win, but meanwhile the child loses by not being with the mother. Its horrible when crimes infiltrate agencies and this isn’t the first time NJ has done things like this.
Try going to NY, and get a good lawyer. One will pick it up contingency. The press should get involved to help the mother.

Sandee July 28, 2009, 10:06 AM

Some people on here can’t read. The 18 year old with 4 kids IS NOT ABOUT THIS WOMEN. The 18 year is a different story about a girl who had triplets.

Tara Kennedy-Kline July 28, 2009, 10:09 AM

Too bad these types of tests and evaluations aren’t done PRIOR to pregnancy! Then again…I am not sure many of us would pass them :o)

Anon July 28, 2009, 10:14 AM

People! THe 18 and 4 kids is a totally separate article unrelated to this one. Are you reading headlines or the entire article????

Annon July 28, 2009, 10:30 AM

This happened in 2006! HOLY COW and it’s making news NOW??

sam July 28, 2009, 11:04 AM

Yes. What if something did happen to her baby and she chose to endanger her baby by not taking life saving measures. We will see in three years from now if her baby has cerebral palsy because of her selfish desire for a vaginal delivery.

Liz July 28, 2009, 11:10 AM

I think the girl needs a refresher course in birth control.With all the birth control available, there’s no excuse not to use it unless it’s a religious thing. It’s possible her behavior may be because of hormones that are so eleveated during pregnancy and if she was on meds for a mental illness, maybe she was off them during her pregnancy to protect the baby. All this could play a part in her behavior. Before they terminate her parental rights, all things should be considered.

Anonymous July 28, 2009, 11:20 AM

I can’t believe there are not other issues here. If this woman is mentally unstable, she should not be a parent. If she has other children, that should be looked into also. Who is caring for them? We Are. I am very sympathetic to mentally challenged people, I worked with them for 23 years. But some should not parent. There are a lot of people struggling with mental disorders and seeing doctors for proper medication that have children and do well. This does not sound like a similiar case.


Leave a reply:



(not displayed)

     




Avoid clicking "Post" more than once
Back to top >>
advertisement