Posted to Videos on
|

Video: Forced C-Section or Lifesaving Decision?

As reported previously on CrownHeights.info, Rinat Dray, a Lubavitcher mother of three, is suing Staten Island University Hospital and two of its doctors for allegedly forcing her to undergo a C-section against her will. CBS’s This Morning show interviewed the mother, her lawyer and others for a segment on the contentious incident.

Please Note: The following video contains images that may not be appropriate for the viewing of men and boys. Watch at your own discretion.

43 Comments

  • 1. Omg!!! wrote:

    Poor woman!!!! Sounds like this dr didn’t care about her at all just wanted to get home…I hope she wins

    Reply
    • 2. Use your brain wrote:

      Her wonderful sense of entitlement not only put the life of her own child at risk, but now likely those of others, as well, since this doctor will now be forced to reconsider performing necessary c-sections.

      Notice how she hired a borderline Orthodox Jew to defend her. That’s no accident. A real Torah Jew would never let a liberal, secular agenda corrupt Hashem’s values, which clearly state that the baby’s life is more important than the mother’s. If she can’t accept this, then it’s time for her to discard her $2,000 sheitel and custom baked cholov yisroel cheesecakes and move back to France where every Jew knows he’s in golus. Her pathetic attempt at garnering sympathy is absolutely disgusting and a chilul Hashem.

    • 3. Big deal wrote:

      The baby’s life is EQUALLY important to the mother’s life once it’s near viable birth (not more important). A so called “Frum” Jew should know this. But I agree her baby’s life is more important than her personal comfort.

  • 5. Bad line wrote:

    Regardless of this particular case, the sentence the lawyer said “You can’t stick a knife in to a woman’s body against her will no matter what”. is wrong. This sentence legitimized the mother to decide ANYTHING not considering the life of the newborn. Although the Mother in this case has a very valid point, her lawyer -which represents her, not himself- should not use this line.

    Reply
    • 6. Milhouse wrote:

      Exactly. If the baby is in danger, the woman has no right to refuse the C-section. I don’t even care what the law says, saving a life is more important than the law. And if this turns out to have been such a case, I’m sure the jury will see it the same way.

  • 7. nice Drs wrote:

    Why put this up on this site. When the Drs. are the ones many community women use. Beside we dont know the Drs side. By the way my wife uses them, and they are very nice and caring.

    Reply
  • 8. i can guess wrote:

    which doctor this was.
    hes forced me to do other things (not as major but nevertheless disturbing).
    women should be aware of their rights and stick up when they can…this particular doctor’s opinion is my way or get out of here.

    Reply
  • 9. Chanie wrote:

    Finally an end to their horrible practices

    Ladies , there are amAzing dr out there , go elsewhere and open ur eyes

    Reply
  • 10. crown heights wrote:

    The whole thing dose not make sence. i used them for the last 20 years i have had such good exsperince with them. now we dont know the other side story.

    Reply
  • 11. medical provider wrote:

    As a medical provider there are some basic rules of practice. If the doctor felt she was doing harm to the unborn child, a psych evaluation for competency should have been done, Also the mom could have been offered a patient representative so that she would not have felt so vulnerable.

    To “nice Drs” , you have obviously never gone through surgery. And because so many women in the community use them they should be aware.

    Reply
    • 12. To "medical provider" wrote:

      Mid-labor there is no time for psych evaluations for competency! The delivery room is not the place to deal with competency evaluations!

  • 13. "I don't have all day for you" wrote:

    The Drs are nice when they have the time. There is one very important sentence the mother said the dr told her “I don’t have all day for you” and that is not ethnic.I was induced because the dr said “It’s better for the baby to come out before 7pm which is the time that he’s finishing his shift…

    Reply
    • 14. To "I dont have all day for you" wrote:

      I think you meant doctors should be ethical, not ethnic

  • 16. Need other side of story wrote:

    The Dr. does care. His view point was probably thinking of both mother and baby. It is difficult to give an opinion because it probably was a horrible experience for her. However, if you did have 2 c-sections prior to this birth it can be difficult to have a natural birth if you are in labor for a longtime. I do not think he did it because he had to go home doctors rotate shifts. May the mother overcome this experience and be blessed with more happy and healthy children.

    Reply
  • 17. Nicest doctors wrote:

    I have used these doctors to deliver all my kids bh and they are so patient and caring and nice. I can’t imagine they had anything but her safety in mind! I think this is just a case of being upset about the situation and looking to blame someone

    Reply
  • 18. honesty wrote:

    The Dr. should have been clear during all her visits that he does not allow vbac if this is his policy. He should not have given her false hope for a natural birth.

    Reply
    • 19. Milhouse wrote:

      How do you know he doesn’t allow it? On the contrary, it’s obvious from this story that he does allow it, since he let her go through several hours of labor trying to deliver, before deciding that the section was necessary.

    • 20. chana wrote:

      Vbac is very different than vba2c. And like milhouse said, he did give her a chance of several hours before deciding to do a c-section.

  • 21. #4 You may want to rethink wrote:

    being a patient of this doctor. It appears that he was insensitive,dismissive and actually quite brutal to this women,offering no opportunity for discussion, when she was at her most vulnerable. Putting this up on the site offers women information so that they can choose to patronize this practice or not. There is no “doctor’s side” at a time like this. The doctor presents his reasoning in the medical notes Crown Hts Bubby

    Reply
  • 22. mother of 5 wrote:

    The lawyer’s comment was to the point, however wince inducing.The doctor told his patient ” don’t speak”, no appeal, no explanation,no discussion, and stuck a knife in her. Evidently,not doing it all that well either, damaging her bladder. I thought the bad old days were over; when doctors,usually male, made all decisions, not taking patients into account at all, acting arrogant, disrespectful and g-d-like.

    Reply
  • 23. nursetzippy wrote:

    Thank Hashem I have chosen the path of becomming a nurse practitioner. We and midwives are trained as providers and nurses to advocate for our patient’s well being, and to inform them, and to guide them in making knowdedgeable decisions on their own! We are not like some of the local physicians that are egotistic, possibly male chuvanistic, with the attitude ” you go my way or the highway”.

    Believe it or not some patients love these types of Doctors who make all their decisions and will not let them think for themselves. We have a few classic ones in this community who is never to be questioned about his plan of care! His attitude is: “trust me or find yourself another Dr.” Maybe in the 1920′s that was the way of medicine, but not anymore!

    As patients and consumer, stand up for yourselves and let your healthcare workers know that your opinions count, and you want to be guided with the Drs.
    knowledge, but ultimately it is the pateint that has to feel confortable and if needed, do your research and he should respect your opinions and if he is not in agreement, he should give you his blessings and respect your decisions to go elsewhere!

    Reply
  • 25. Great Dane wrote:

    What kind of sick world do we live in that allows a woman to endanger her fetus and the doctor is not allowed to use his/her medical knowledge and judgement to do what’s best?

    Reply
    • 26. thank you wrote:

      if her baby died, she would have been singing a whole different tune. Stupid doctor- trying to save the life of the baby at the cost of mom’s comfort and opinion.

  • 28. yI wrote:

    I really hope all the comments on here are coming from men. If you are a woman commenting who has given birth and you are still judging this mother you should be ashamed of yourself. What mother doesn’t want the best for her child!?! How dare you claim that she only had selfish reasons for wanting a natural birth, at the expense of endangering her child??? THINK, PEOPLE!!!!!

    Reply
    • 29. Great Dane wrote:

      It could very well be that the doctor, having medical knowledge and years of expertise, knows a wee bit more than this mother. While I can understand the laboring woman wanting a vbac, the doctor, because s/he is not in pain, can make a clear headed decision about what’s best for the baby and mother.

    • 31. chana wrote:

      How would a VBA2C have helped her child? In general, the rule is that emergency c-sections can only benefit the child (elective c-sections, when you choose when to give birth, are a different story).

      The mother wanted, understandably, to avoid the operating room, the recovery room, the pain when laughing or nursing, the birth control afterwards, and the knowledge that sometimes after too many c-sections pregnancy becomes a danger to the mother. All these are legitimate concerns and desires, but they still take second place after concern for the life of the mother and baby.

      None of the concerns I mentioned negatively influence the baby; the mother also specifically mentioned shorter recovery time as her motive for wanting a regular birth. In other words, insisting on a regular birth when the doctor thinks otherwise has only selfish motives and the baby’s welfare was not a concern.

      Also, how does she know that she wouldn’t have ended up with a vacuum delivery and a lot of third degree tears? Her recovery may very well have been the same as after a c-section. Not to mention the fact that if the doctor is concerned about uterine rupture, the consequences are severe hemorrhage and/or a hysterectomy….

    • 32. chana wrote:

      The consequences of not listening to the doctor when he wants to do a c-section to avoid uterine rupture. Not the consequences of a c-section, obviously.

  • 33. a thought wrote:

    I have had quite a few children & I agree that women should be able to decide for themselves – but not during heavy labor when there seems to be an emergency situation. My daughter had this dr during delivery & I am her advocate/labor coach. When he wanted to give her a particular treatment that I felt was not the best option during labor I disagreed. I am NOT a medical provider, just a mom. But he listened & did what we wanted, because it was a medically sound alternative. No, he is not the nicest man, no, he doesn’t have a great bedside manner, but he is competent, and he was respectful. BTW the baby was born a short time later B”H.

    While I understand Mrs. Dray’s emotional pain, I guess she was somewhat difficult during labor. Doctors are human & they can only take so much from hysterical patients. I don’t understand why she is suing him & worse, why she needs to go public & make a chilul Hashem. The health of both mom & baby are all that matters at this time, & this doctor was using his medical experience and expertise to assess the situation. Mrs. Dray has a healthy, beautiful child, B”H, but it could have been so different. She’s not a doctor & if you don’t trust your doctor, why go to him in the first place?

    Reply
  • 34. If she didn't have the C Section wrote:

    If she gotten her way and had it natural and if it had gone wrong, Chas v’Shalom, she would be suing the doctor for NOT doing the C Section. She would have said, “You are the doctor…you know better than I. You should have overridden my decision…”
    Folks, you live in a country where suing is a way of life.

    Reply
  • 35. idiot wrote:

    What a chillul lubavitch. She made a bad decision to fight what was clearly a necessary surgery, and now she is publicly announcing her stupidity. The doctors should reverse sue her, and tell every doctor in the tri state area not to accept her as a patient. And yes, I understand all about vbac, having had 5 c-sections, and wanting a natural. But the same aibershter who made some people with eyes tthat are blind, or ears that dont hear, there are some women who simply cannot have a natural baby boruch hashem that there is c-sections as an options.
    This woman should get some therapy. Many woman need therapy after an unexpected section. They feel like they didnt perform as well as they should have. And she should equally publicly apologize to the doctors.

    Reply
  • 36. CH Mommy wrote:

    While I do support this woman’s choice to try for a VBAC delivery, she probably would have been better off going to a Dr. that specializes in high risk pregnancy/delivery.

    Reply
  • 37. I also sued that practice and won wrote:

    To all of you who are bashing this woman. This group of doctors are very nice till something goes wrong. My baby and I almost died and we were niglected! Bh we survived but the we are suffering some things until today! Good luck Rinat! No this is not about money it’s about teaching them that we are humans not objects

    Reply
  • 38. Brave Woman wrote:

    I think Rinat is a quite a brave woman who found strength to disagree with the doc – who characterized by many in this forum as a jerk, at times.

    I am quite convinced that there were no really “emergency” and baby was fine. I haven’t seen any sane malpractice lawyer who so baldly challenged “emergent CS” without having a couple of expert opinions challenging the doc judgment or statements. Legally speaking, declaration of emergent CS is a license to kill – no lawyer will challenge morbidity and mortality after emergent CS in a court of law. That emboldens physicians and contributes to unusually high CS rate. So wait and see.

    I strongly believe that the patient has right to be treated with dignity and respect; the patient is ultimately decides – and caries responsibility for his/her decisions – what treatment is the best for him/her. If patient says “No” – back off.

    I also find OB physicians “concern for fetus” not always genuine. The OB physicians that deliver babies in AM, do abortions in PM.

    Lastly, L&D is a healthy process by default; physician are trained to look for pathology by default. So, I won’t get surprised that “healthy” and “un-healthy” becomes the same for some OB physicians.

    Having said all that, I must admit – OB is a very difficult and taxing service to practice. So my hat off for OB docs who, despite stress, sleepiness nights and screams of laboring ladies, remain humble, compassionate, supportive and professional. G-d Bless them.

    As a conclusion:
    1. Choose midwives for your wives
    2. If you are an jerk who wants to be a physician – choose Anesthesia, Critical Care, or the best, Pathology – unconscious patient don’t really care about your bad attitude.

    Reply
  • 39. The Real Chilul Hashem wrote:

    The real chilul Hashem are the comments on here. The life of the mother by halacha always supersedes the life of the child. Many women experience recovery differently after cesareans and this idea that we have in our heads that we don’t have rights to our own bodies during labor and doctors knows best is wrong. This doctor in essence has cut off this woman’s ability to have more children and damaged her mentally. The truth is, this is a kiddush Hashem and brings light to a very sad and scary part of medical care in America, where women become voiceless and in essence are raped by practitioners while their husbands and family members ask them to just take it.

    Reply
    • 40. Man wrote:

      The Real Chilul Hashem wrote: “The life of the mother by halacha always supersedes the life of the child”

      What are you talking about? This is a patently false statement. Once the baby is almost born, it’s not so simple.

      The Real Chilul Hashem wrote: “This doctor in essence has cut off this woman’s ability to have more children and damaged her mentally.”

      No he didn’t. Nothing he did changed her ability to get pregnant and go through another high-risk pregnancy. Had he not performed the c-section, things would have likely been much, much worse… She already demonstrated “mental damage” by insisting on natural birth despite her doctor’s repeated warnings. Unless he smashed her over the head with hammer before the delivery, nothing he did caused her to think this way.

      The Real Chilul Hashem wrote: “This is a kiddush Hashem and brings light to a very sad and scary part of medical care in America, where women become voiceless and in essence are raped by practitioners while their husbands and family members ask them to just take it.”

      Had the doctor allowed her to have a natural birth, you’d be saying the same thing. It seems your problem is with men, in general, and male doctors, in particular… By casually tossing around the words “voiceless” and “rape” you are demeaning their value for women who are actually voiceless and being raped, chas v’shalom.

      If you don’t like what you see in the mirror, it’s not a man’s fault.

  • 41. Anonymous wrote:

    Whether the C-section in this particular case was the right thing to do or not we don’t know-was the baby or mother in “distress” (ie low heart rate,high blood pressure,etc). This will be decided if it goes to court. But the situation points to another huge problem with childbirth in America and probably many other countries in that women really are “voiceless” unless they have their babies at home. In most hospitals there are the routines of monitors,IV’s-just making the whole process a set up for a possible emergency and maybe causing the emergency-ie having the woman lie down most of the time and possibly cutting off oxygen to the infant-causing the low heartbeat.

    Reply
  • 42. chana wrote:

    1. VBA2C is very very risky and it’s a miracle she was even allowed to try, especially considering that in all probability, she failed to achieve VBAC once already. Simu lev, she’s had 2 c-sections already…which is VERY different than a woman after with no history of c-sections or even after one c-section.

    2. She would be suing the doctor anyways, if her baby hadn’t made it.
    2a. In order to decide if the doctor was right or not we need to hear his side, too.

    3. My husband says the hospital should’ve refused to let her try at all and said, “Find somewhere else to kill yourself.” I think the doctor should have given her a form to sign that explicitly stated all the risks, including maternal and/or fetal demise, and told her to either sign the consent form for the operation or sign that she was aware that not operating could mean killing herself and/or her baby. That way it’s not on their head, but on hers.

    4. You should always have someone there to ask questions and speak for you. At the same time, if you’re so smart, why bother going to the doctor at all?

    Reply
    • 43. It is not "Very, Very" risky wrote:

      WBAC 2 is as risky as RCS (repeat cesarian section)

      Read this:

      “Comparing VBAC-2 versus RCS, the hysterectomy rates were 0.40% versus 0.63% (P = 0.63), transfusion 1.68% versus 1.67% (P = 0.86) and febrile morbidity 6.03% versus 6.39%, respectively (P = 0.27). Maternal morbidity of VBAC-2 was comparable to RCS. Neonatal morbidity data were too limited to draw valid conclusions, however, no significant differences were indicated in VBAC-2, VBAC-1 and RCS groups in NNU admission rates and asphyxial injury/neonatal death rates (Mantel-Haenszel)”
      From:
      Tahseen, S., & Griffiths, M. (2010). Vaginal birth after two caesarean sections (VBAC-2)-a systematic review with meta-analysis of success rate and adverse outcomes of VBAC-2 versus VBAC-1 and repeat (third) caesarean sections. BJOG : an International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 117(1), 5–19. doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2009.02351.x

Leave Comment

Comment moderation is in use. Please do not submit your comment twice -- it will appear shortly.