Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Redfairen

(1,276 posts)
Tue Dec 3, 2013, 01:48 PM Dec 2013

Catholic hospital's religious rules led to negligent care in miscarriage, ACLU says

Source: NBC News

A Michigan woman who suffered a dangerous, painful and prolonged miscarriage when she was 18 weeks pregnant is at the center of a lawsuit that claims she was denied appropriate treatment by a Catholic hospital guided by religious, not medical, concerns.

The American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Michigan are suing the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops on behalf of Tamesha Means, 30, of Muskegon, Mich., according to a lawsuit filed Friday in U.S. district court in eastern Michigan.

The suit comes amid growing numbers of mergers between Catholic hospitals and non-religious systems in the U.S. and it argues that the Bishops’ directives — particularly those that ban abortion — result in negligent treatment for certain patients.

“They have an obligation to ensure that the directives do not increase harm to women’s health and that women have the information they need,” said Louise Melling, an ACLU spokeswoman.




Read more: http://m.nbcnews.com/health/catholic-hospitals-religious-rules-led-negligent-care-miscarriage-aclu-says-2D11674429

27 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Catholic hospital's religious rules led to negligent care in miscarriage, ACLU says (Original Post) Redfairen Dec 2013 OP
screw the catholic bishops weissmam Dec 2013 #1
Hit them in the wallet. It's the only way they learn. nt msanthrope Dec 2013 #2
However don't hit them too hard warrant46 Dec 2013 #7
If the Catholic Health Systems want to bankrupt themselves, they can be msanthrope Dec 2013 #8
No offense to your post warrant46 Dec 2013 #9
A bankruptcy judge puts the hospital up for sale and someone buys it Major Nikon Dec 2013 #14
Thank you !! warrant46 Dec 2013 #16
Here are some filing for bankruptcy RainDog Dec 2013 #20
Chapter 11 does NOT bring with it discharge of debts happyslug Dec 2013 #25
A D&C is an abortion mdbl Dec 2013 #3
NO lunasun Dec 2013 #26
I'm too angered by the hospital's action to think of anything coherent (or printable) to say... Demoiselle Dec 2013 #4
All the doctors and nurses, plus hospital administrator, need to be tsuki Dec 2013 #5
+1 Dawson Leery Dec 2013 #6
What has never ceased to amaze me as that these decisions SheilaT Dec 2013 #10
Catholics - equal opportunity torturers lark Dec 2013 #11
anti abortion believers number 1 argument for voting Republican PatrynXX Dec 2013 #12
Catholic hospitals should all just be banned by law. Vashta Nerada Dec 2013 #13
+100000000000000! SunSeeker Dec 2013 #17
There are many times a woman may need what the RW'ers dub an "abortion". hue Dec 2013 #15
The issue is should the Hospital told the mother or the option of abortion. happyslug Dec 2013 #18
The case also states she suffered pain and potential damage RainDog Dec 2013 #21
Pain and Damages is the excuse for this Case happyslug Dec 2013 #22
thanks. your last two graphs get at what I wondered RainDog Dec 2013 #23
This is truly disgusting! SkyDaddy7 Dec 2013 #19
I Know RobinA Dec 2013 #24
I read this earlier today davidpdx Dec 2013 #27

warrant46

(2,205 posts)
7. However don't hit them too hard
Tue Dec 3, 2013, 02:34 PM
Dec 2013

Rather than pay the outstanding jury rendered civil judgments for their deeds.

The Catholic Church has directed a dozen or so of their Diocese Leader Bishops, file Federal Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Petitions to avoid paying child victims who were raped and molested by the Shepherds of the Flock (The Pedophile Priests)

The same thing will happen to the injured malpractice victims.

This bunch is only interesting in putting their money back to work, attempting to outlawing abortions in the United States

 

msanthrope

(37,549 posts)
8. If the Catholic Health Systems want to bankrupt themselves, they can be
Tue Dec 3, 2013, 02:49 PM
Dec 2013

sold to other companies. let the market work.

warrant46

(2,205 posts)
9. No offense to your post
Tue Dec 3, 2013, 03:01 PM
Dec 2013

But how will that work ?

Will they just sell the building, assets will the employees stay there who will insure the place?

Bankruptcies are always a mess and no one ever seems to win or even (make out successfully)

Major Nikon

(36,827 posts)
14. A bankruptcy judge puts the hospital up for sale and someone buys it
Tue Dec 3, 2013, 04:22 PM
Dec 2013

Why would anyone who buys a hospital not want to retain the workers who are making it profitable?

Bankruptcies are a mess when businesses are unprofitable, not when they get sued into oblivion through mismanagement. In the case of the latter only those at the highest level need fear for their jobs, and rightly so in this instance.

RainDog

(28,784 posts)
20. Here are some filing for bankruptcy
Tue Dec 3, 2013, 10:49 PM
Dec 2013

This one is in Gallup, New Mexico and includes some reservation land. Maybe Cher can buy it and let the Native Americans manage it (said b/c of her thanksgiving post about land lost to various tribes.)

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/04/us-usa-church-abuse-idUSBRE98304G20130904

In Minnesota, this may happen...

http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2013/10/22/catholic-church/bankruptcy-an-option-for-archdiocese

9 have applied for bankruptcy protection so far. Hey, Occupy could start something like the rolling jubilee project and buy these and give them to other organizations to handle... or let the hospital workers create a worker controlled/operated hospital.

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865585927/Ninth-Catholic-Diocese-will-file-for-bankruptcy-protection.html

 

happyslug

(14,779 posts)
25. Chapter 11 does NOT bring with it discharge of debts
Wed Dec 4, 2013, 01:18 AM
Dec 2013

To have a discharge in Debt you must file Chapter 7, and corporations (like the Diocese) can NOT file chapter 7.

General Motors Style Chapter 11

Thus Chapter 11 is the option the Diocese has decided to do. Chapter 11 is an reorganization of debts, all debts still have to be paid (unless reduced for some reason, including agreement by the creditors). The GM Chapter 11, is a classic example. GM filed Chapter 11, sold most of its assets to a new General Motors Company (In August 2009 as it filed Bankruptcy, they was talk of GM changing in Logo from Blue to Green to show that the General Motors Company was NOT the GM of old, the change turned out to be just talk).

Thus today, there is two GM, General Motors Company, the company that Purchased what General Motors Corporation owned and was willing to sell to General Motors Company and Motors Liquidation Company, what General Motors Corporation changed its name to once all the good assets were sold to General Motors Company.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motors_Liquidation_Company

General Motors Company LLC, was owned 60.8% by the US Government, 11.7% by the Government of Canada and 17.5% by the United Auto Workers and the remaining 10% to go to the General Creditors of General Motors Corporation. General Motors Company purchased most of the assets of General Motors Corporation. The money used to buy the assets are to pay off the various creditors of General Motors Corporation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_Chapter_11_reorganization

I bring it up, for while we think in terms of GM surviving the Chapter 11 reorganization, in legal reality what we call GM today is a new entity that just paid the Bankruptcy Courts for the assets of General Motors Corporation. GM Corporation is now Motor Liquidation Company (MLC) not GM.

Technically a Diocese may do the same, set up a new non-profit corporation, sell its assets, in an open auction supervised by the Bankruptcy Court, to that new non-profit, and then let the old non-profit use those assets to pay off the creditors of the Diocese. The Diocese, like GM, can get on with its works, while the old non-profit uses any assets it retains (including what it received in the auction) to pay off all Creditors.

Sears, K-Mart and other retailers Chapter 11

Another way Chapter 11 can be used is for the Diocese to file the Chapter 11, and then set up the Creditors into various classes. The Diocese can then tell them its total value and how much it can pay each class. Secured Creditors must be paid to the full value of anything they hold a security interest in (i.e. any mortgage on any property must be paid in full, unless the mortgage exceeds the value of the property, then only to the value of the property). Unsecured priority creditors must be paid (these are employee salary). Unsecured Creditor gets to divide up what is left. If both sides reach an agreement the retailer gets out of Chapter 11, if any of the classes of Creditors object, a hearing must be held and the Judge gets to decide if the objection to the proposal is correct.

In most such cases, the unsecured creditors are sellers to the retailers, and thus willing to come to terms (they have written off what had been sold, and know the only way for them to make money is to sell to the retailer, so they comes to terms). In cases where litigation is a class of creditors, it is often harder to get them to agree, for how much they are owned is often up to a jury to decide in a separate court action. Thus hard for each members of such a Class of Creditors to decide how much is the value of their claim, thus hard for them to agree to how many pennies on the dollar they are entitled to get.

Technically if no agreement is made with all classes of Creditors, the Bankruptcy Judge can order the sell of the assets and the creditors get to divide up what is received in such a sale (This is what happened to Schwinn, the assets of Schwinn came no where near the claims against Schwinn, and thus its assets, including its name was sold at auction in 1994).

In most cases, the Bankrupt company gets all of the Classes to agree and it emerges from Bankruptcy with new shareholders (who were the old unsecured Creditors), In the case of the Diocese, since it is a non-profit, it can sell its assets and used them to pay off its creditors. In the case of the cases in litigation it can hold off paying ALL of its Creditors, till that limitation is finished and the amount fixed as to number. Once the last lawsuit is resolved, all of the creditors (including the people who sured the Diocese) can divide up assets, once the assets are reduced to a dollar amount.

What I think will happened

The Diocese will file the Chapter 11. It will not want to sell its Churches for neither it, the people suing the Church and the Bankruptcy judge can come up with a good value for such property. Most Churches are barns, to large to convert to anything more then a warehouse. The Stain Glass windows, have value, but once removed from the Church has little resale value for most such Stain Glass is only appreciated in a large building like a church, and most other users of such large buildings see no value in having them. This goes for most of the items inside a Church, high value for the Church, limited if any value outside the church.

As I said, the Churches have value in themselves, but most are based on location. Most are in neighborhoods not business districts, so they have a very limited value to retailers. They have very limited value as warehouses, mostly do to being in locations away from other trucking infrastructure. While I know of two former protestant Churches converted to homes and businesses, these were small churches compared to most Catholic Churches (One church was converted to a one engine fire station, it still has its stain glass windows in its basement). Another to a Doctor's office. The reason for these re use was they was a demand for both in that area and the parish grew to large so they moved to a larger church and sold the smaller church. Churches tend to have no interior baring walls, thus like a barn you can build the inside as you see fit, but only if they is a demand for that type of building. In most cases they is no demand, thus it is not unusual to see old churches just be abandoned and fall apart for no one see how they can use it.

On top of this you have people who will object to the re use of a church, on the grounds it was sacred. These people tend to see such building collapse then restored but at times they have a point. Some Churches signify certain historical events and thus should be maintain to remember those events, even Stalin the enemy of the Orthodox Church saw this value in many of the old Orthodox Churches of Russia (and torn down some, many other Communists pointed out were even more historical).

Since this is DU I will concentrate on the financial and physical problems with selling Churches not the objection based on religion. I will only mention it in passing for the Court will have to consider those objection when it comes to selling these properties and how many potential bidders will stay away just because they do NOT want to be connected to the idea of selling a church.

Thus the assets of the Diocese is limited, but its ability to raise money is decent. On the other hand, if the Churches are sold, how does the Diocese raise money to pay off its creditors?

Thus I see a Chapter 11 filing, not as a delaying action, but as a way to get all of this behind the future of the Diocese. The Diocese will report to the Bankruptcy Judge and its Creditors all of its assets and what it things they can be sold for. The Debtors will have the right to object. Any dispute as to assets and assets value will be decided by the Bankruptcy Judge. People who have claims (including pedophile clams) will have to make a claim (and in pedophile claims ask permission to file a State Claim, such permission will be granted, and either the parties will agree to an amount or wait to how the State Action unfolds). Sooner or later all the parties will have to agree to the total value of the Assets of the Diocese, and the total amount of claims against the Diocese. When that is finally determined, how much each creditor will get (and when) will be set by agreement. If a party does not agree, the Bankruptcy Judge will have a hearing and decide what that Creditor is entitled to (and most often then not what the other parties have agreed to).

Give that pedophile cases take a few years to get through the Court System, this will be in Bankruptcy for a few years, till either the last pedophile is decided by judge and jury or by a consent agreement. Given most people prefer they money NOW not five years from now, most people will reach an agreement.

mdbl

(4,973 posts)
3. A D&C is an abortion
Tue Dec 3, 2013, 02:14 PM
Dec 2013

That's what it is classified. If the fetus dies but won't dispel naturally, an abortion has to be performed. Do these religious whackos have any common sense at all?

tsuki

(11,994 posts)
5. All the doctors and nurses, plus hospital administrator, need to be
Tue Dec 3, 2013, 02:19 PM
Dec 2013

reported to the State Department of Business and Professional Regulation. The Nursing Board and the Physician Board will hold hearings. It might not result in a suspension of license, but it begins a paper trail.

 

SheilaT

(23,156 posts)
10. What has never ceased to amaze me as that these decisions
Tue Dec 3, 2013, 03:12 PM
Dec 2013

are invariably made by persons who will never themselves be pregnant.

Not to mention that the doctors involved don't tell the hospital to go take a hike while they give the appropriate treatment in these circumstances.

lark

(23,096 posts)
11. Catholics - equal opportunity torturers
Tue Dec 3, 2013, 03:22 PM
Dec 2013

Both young boys and women have reason to fear Catholics and their institutions.

PatrynXX

(5,668 posts)
12. anti abortion believers number 1 argument for voting Republican
Tue Dec 3, 2013, 03:39 PM
Dec 2013

Is Abortion is the #1 murder as far as stats. Willing to sell their souls to the devil for this idea. as I don't have the stats. and usually don't have the time to come back here (yes I'm reactionary) it'd be nice to PM me the link if someone does. or the link back here. I have ADD thats my problem

 

Vashta Nerada

(3,922 posts)
13. Catholic hospitals should all just be banned by law.
Tue Dec 3, 2013, 03:44 PM
Dec 2013

If they don't want to practice the medicine, they shouldn't exist. Period.

hue

(4,949 posts)
15. There are many times a woman may need what the RW'ers dub an "abortion".
Tue Dec 3, 2013, 04:41 PM
Dec 2013

Ectopic and/or tubal pregnancies for example. A catholic hospital must have special dispensation for a gynecologist to do a tubal ligation even if it is clear that another pregnancy will threaten the lady's life.
I know a lady who was very big during her 4th month of pregnancy and the doctor & everyone actually were thinking maybe she's having twins (this was years ago before ultrasounds were routine).
So she had an ultrasound & it showed the fetus to be grossly malformed with a hydrocephalic (water head) and ancephalic brain. The fetus also had other deformities. The head was so large that by the time the amniocentesis, genetic testing, counseling, family discussions etc. were finished it was recommended she have an abortion. It was considered a late term abortion and not expected to survive even if she did go into labor spontaneously not to mention the grave risk to her own life. She & her husband were devastated as this was their 2nd child that they had so happily planned for.
They went to a Jewish hospital. They needed to continue some grieving counseling afterward. Within 2 weeks they started receiving hate mail from anti abortion groups--this was before the HIPPA laws.

I have never seen any reason for a politician to be legislating laws that are blanket decisions for anyone's healthcare--esp. women!
Repukes have demonstrated their stupidity time & time again! And they want to enjoy the power to make decisions over womens' healthcare!!

 

happyslug

(14,779 posts)
18. The issue is should the Hospital told the mother or the option of abortion.
Tue Dec 3, 2013, 07:21 PM
Dec 2013
Because of the Catholic-run hospital’s medical directives, which prohibit abortion, Means was not told that the child had “virtually no chance of surviving” and that continuing the pregnancy would endanger her health.

“Nor did MHP tell Ms. Means that the safest treatment option was to induce labor and terminate the pregnancy,” the complaint says. “MHP also did not tell Ms. Means that it would not terminate her pregnancy, even if necessary for her health, because it was prohibited from doing so by the Directives.”


Thus the negligent care was NOT anything the Hospital did, but that it FAILED to inform the Plaintiff of her option to have an abortion.

When I first read this Topic I wondered why the ACLU was filing it ins tread of some private law-firm. From reading the article I see why, the Plaintiff suffered no "Harm" in the sense the hospital did all that was proper when her water broke the the child was born dead. No one is complaining about how the actual birth was handled.

Thus the ACLU is NOT expecting to get much money in this case (given the US Supreme Court recent rulings on punitive damages, i.e. punitive damages can be restricted to a set ratio to actual damages). Given the prospect of little money, private lawyers opt NOT to take the case ( I suspect the Mother is on some sort of medical insurance, and any recovery will have to pay back the insurance company first, this is especially true if the Mother was on Welfare).

Remember (Excluding Punitive damages) you can ONLY get money for damages you incur, how much pain did she go through over and above what she would have gone through in a normal birth? How much LESS pain would she had suffered if the child had been born DEAD, without any prior treatment by the Hospital?

At Trial, everyone will concede that the Fetus was NOT viable, thus the death of the Fetus will NOT be at issue. The real issue is how much better would it have been for the Mother to abort the Fetus then to give birth the way she did. That is a hard hill to climb.

Now, the ACLU may see this case as a way to look into internal documents of the Catholic Church on this issue. Such fishing expeditions are often done in such cases but the Courts have been cracking down on such discovery efforts when it becomes clear that such requests for internal documents is clearly NOT related to the issue at hand. On the other hand, the Courts have tended to permit discovery of the other sides documents during pre-trial discovery if such documents MIGHT be a factor in the case.

I suspect the ACLU is seeing this case as a way to look at the internal papers of both the Hospital and the Bishops, papers the ACLU otherwise would NOT be permitted to read. Thus the real question is how much of such material will the Judge who oversees the case, rule is material to the case?

In my opinion, this case will NOT go to trial, it will be decided on how much discovery the Judge will permit the ACLU to do in regards to the internal records of the Hospital and the Bishops.

One last comment, if a was the Lawyers for the Bishops and the Hospital, I would file a Demur to the Complaint. A Demur is a motion to dismiss the case on the grounds that ever if everything in the complaint is true, the Defendants would still win. No discovery is needed in a demure, the only issue is how much damages are to be paid. If the Judge finds no damages (or whatever was the damages, those had already been paid), the Judge will dismiss the case.

Under the Common Law Pleadings, a Demur was a two edge sword, if the Defendant filed a Demurr and lost, the Defendant had to pay any alleged damages. Today, that rule is long gone. Today a Defendant can file a Demurr and if the Judge Rule in favor of the Plaintiff, the Defendant can still file a Answer and Discovery would begin. Thus the next filing should be a Demurr and a motion to dismiss, filed by the Defendants. Lets see what happens next.

RainDog

(28,784 posts)
21. The case also states she suffered pain and potential damage
Tue Dec 3, 2013, 10:58 PM
Dec 2013

not just that she was not informed.

Do you think the ACLU might be taking this case to set a precedent for others who are not offered counseling about abortion as a way to make it a civil lit. danger not to? I ask because of this -

The suit comes amid growing numbers of mergers between Catholic hospitals and non-religious systems in the U.S. and it argues that the Bishops’ directives — particularly those that ban abortion — result in negligent treatment for certain patients.


iow, it's not just about Catholic hospitals - it's about their mergers with non-religious groups and their responsibility to uphold law regarding health care for women, whether they have a religious objection or not, esp. when they are in biz with non-religious groups.
 

happyslug

(14,779 posts)
22. Pain and Damages is the excuse for this Case
Tue Dec 3, 2013, 11:56 PM
Dec 2013

Unless there is some pain (Which by itself can be damages) or some other damage, you have no right to recovery (and if a Plaintiff has nothing to recover, then a demurr is called for to dismiss the case).

You have to claim some sort of damage (pain is a damage) and some how be able to show that damage actually occurred AND how much it will cost you in terms of money. This is a money suit, if damages can not be undone in some form of Money, the case will be dismissed.

Now, the allegation is the Woman Suffered Pain and that is damages, do to the Hospital, whose expertise she relied on, failed to inform her of the option to get an abortion.

The Defense will be no damages were incurred, for an abortion at that late stage would have been as painful.

While the article brings up Religion, the courts will avoid that issue for the simple reason the test is what is the local practice in the medical community. i.e. Is what the Hospital did, within what is practice among Hospitals in such situations. Religion can come in as WHY the hospital varied from such practice but ONLY after such practice is first determined to be outside normal practice. The test will be what is normal practice, how did the Hospital vary from that practice and what damage did that cause the victim i.e the Plaintiff/ Mother?

Religion can come into play as to WHY such variation from normal practice came into general use, but only after it is first found that what the hospital did was outside normal practice.

It is a fine line here that the ACLU is trying to jump. The ACLU wants to show that the Hospital did NOT follow normal procedure in this type of case do to this Ruling from the Bishops. If the Hospital followed the Bishops instructions AND Stayed within Normal procedures in this type of case, then no liability.

If anyone in the Hospital referred the Mother to another Doctor to get advice, and she did not, that may come within Normal Procedure (even if told to do so by a Nurse verbally).

The issue of religious Hospitals and non-Religious hospitals merging is not a big issue, the big issue is did the resulting merged hospital follow generally accepted medical procedure in this case. This will become a Doctor vs Doctor case, where both sides bringing Doctors to testify what is the practice in this area of Medicine.

Now, both sides may bring in outside experts as to this level of care, but the courts have puts limits on such experts. The main limit is what is the LOCAL PRACTICE not the National Practice. Local is NOT defined but it does exclude an expert whose practice has been on the West Coast for example (Through someone who practice on the West Coast MAY testify if he says what he is testifying to is normal practice clear across the country OR he or she is familiar with local Practice).

You quickly see this is an area of expertise among lawyers. I do NOT do that type of practice, but know enough to see the ACLU has a tough road to travel for them to prevail.

Do to the above I do NOT see Religion coming into play, except as a side issue as to WHY the Hospital did as it did, the real issue will be what was the Correct Medical Practice AND the amount of harm the victim suffered.

Please note, in most areas with Catholic and Non-Catholic Hospitals, it is common practice to refer expected Mother like the Plaintiff to another Hospital for advice in such cases. The ACLU knows this and is saying that they were NO other hospital for the Mother to go to or to be referred to. In many ways the ACLU is saying is such situations, when all of the local Hospital are Catholic, such Hospitals are NO longer private but more like a Public Utility in that it must provide services to everyone, even services it does NOT want to provide.

In simple terms, as long as they are more then one option, no problem with what the Catholic Hospital did, but once a Catholic Hospital is the only choice, it should be treated as a Public Utility not a private hospital. The courts are going to have a hard time accepting that as legal doctrine, but we will see if the Courts adopt it, given the circumstances in this case.



RainDog

(28,784 posts)
23. thanks. your last two graphs get at what I wondered
Wed Dec 4, 2013, 12:11 AM
Dec 2013

as far as a strategy to make sure women in underserved areas are still provided choice, as is the federal law, no matter what entity provides the services.

and maybe they took this case for that exact reason - so that they would have a case to cite as precedent for any future litigation as places like Texas, for instance, put more and more constraints on Planned Parenthood clinics that are beyond anything necessary, but are just a legal way to restrict access to abortion by creating situations that make it harder to provide abortions by legal means other than outright overturning of Roe v. Wade.

SkyDaddy7

(6,045 posts)
19. This is truly disgusting!
Tue Dec 3, 2013, 08:44 PM
Dec 2013

Some of these women had no choice as these socalled "hospitals" we're the only thing close by.

I struggle to understand how anyone could associate themselves with such people & continue to not only identify as a Catholic but give money to this corrupt, child molesting, woman hating, anti-science organization???

If this were any other group, club or political party many of the same people would have left it long ago...They would NEVER EVER willfully be associated with such disgusting people or continue giving such an organization money! But due to how religion warps people's minds the same people will ignore, make excuses & even get very upset at folks like myself who struggle to understand WHY?!?!?!

This does not only apply to Catholics...Most Christians are associated with churches who share the same perverted Bronze Age style of thinking especially here in the USA!

RobinA

(9,888 posts)
24. I Know
Wed Dec 4, 2013, 12:12 AM
Dec 2013

of a similar incident in a non-Catholic hospital. Conditions became such that the baby would not survive, although the problem was not with the fetus, it was not viable at that time. Abortion would have been late term. Mom had to lay in the hospital until either the baby died on its own or she developed an infection that threatened her life. Both happened at about the same time, so she got to deliver a dead baby while battling an infection. Some things make you understand terrorism.

davidpdx

(22,000 posts)
27. I read this earlier today
Wed Dec 4, 2013, 07:41 AM
Dec 2013

While I want to be shocked, I'm not. This was pure out and out torture of the poor woman by not giving her proper medical care.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Catholic hospital's relig...