Pemberton v. Tallahassee Memorial Regional Center

Last updated

Pemberton v. Tallahassee Memorial Regional Center
Court United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida
Full case namePemberton v. Tallahassee Memorial Regional Center, Inc.
DecidedOctober 13, 1999
Docket nos.4:98-cv-00161
Citation66 F. Supp. 2d 1247
Court membership
Judge sitting Robert Lewis Hinkle

Pemberton v. Tallahassee Memorial Regional Center, 66 F. Supp. 2d 1247 (N.D. Fla. 1999), is a case in the United States regarding reproductive rights. In particular, the case explored the limits of a woman's right to choose her medical treatment in light of fetal rights at the end of pregnancy.

Contents

Pemberton had a previous c-section with a vertical incision, and with her second child attempted to have a VBAC (vaginal birth after c-section). However, since she could not find any doctor willing to assist her in this endeavor, she labored at home, with a midwife. [1]

When a doctor she had approached about a related issue at the Tallahassee Memorial Regional Center found out, he and the hospital sued to force her to get a c-section. The court held that the rights of the fetus at or near birth outweighed the rights of Pemberton to determine her own medical care. [2] [3] She was physically forced to go to the hospital, where a c-section was performed. [1]

Her suit against the hospital was dismissed. [1] The court held that a cesarean section at the end of a full-term pregnancy was here deemed to be medically necessary by doctors to avoid a substantial risk that the fetus would die during delivery due to uterine rupture. The risk of uterine rupture was estimated at 4–6% according to the hospital's doctors and 2% according to Pemberton's doctors. Furthermore, the court held that a state's interest in preserving the life of an unborn child outweighed the mother's constitutional interest of bodily integrity. [4] The court held that Roe v. Wade was not applicable, because bearing an unwanted child is a greater intrusion on the mother's constitutional interests than undergoing a cesarean section to deliver a child that the mother affirmatively desires to deliver. The court further distinguished In re A.C. by stating that it left open the possibility that a non-consenting patient's interest would yield to a more compelling countervailing interest in an "extremely rare and truly exceptional case." The court then held this case to be such. [1] [5]

Later case involving Tallahassee

In March 2009, a Leon County Circuit Court ordered Samantha Burton, then 25 weeks pregnant with her third child, to remain in Tallahassee Memorial Hospital on bed rest against her will. [6] [7] Three days after the court order was issued, Burton had an emergency C-section, resulting in a stillbirth. [8] The next year, the Florida District Court of Appeals ruled that the court cannot impose unwanted treatment on a pregnant woman "in the best interests of the fetus" without providing evidence of fetal viability. [9]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Caesarean section</span> Surgical procedure to deliver a baby through an incision in the mothers abdomen

Caesarean section, also known as C-section, cesarean, or caesarean delivery, is the surgical procedure by which one or more babies are delivered through an incision in the mother's abdomen. It is often performed because vaginal delivery would put the mother or child at risk. Reasons for the operation include obstructed labor, twin pregnancy, high blood pressure in the mother, breech birth, shoulder presentation, and problems with the placenta or umbilical cord. A caesarean delivery may be performed based upon the shape of the mother's pelvis or history of a previous C-section. A trial of vaginal birth after C-section may be possible. The World Health Organization recommends that caesarean section be performed only when medically necessary.

Doe v. Bolton, 410 U.S. 179 (1973), was a decision of the Supreme Court of the United States overturning the abortion law of Georgia. The Supreme Court's decision was released on January 22, 1973, the same day as the decision in the better-known case of Roe v. Wade.

The term wrongful abortion refers to an abortion that a pregnant woman undergoes as a result of negligent or malicious conduct by a physician or health care provider.

In case of a previous caesarean section a subsequent pregnancy can be planned beforehand to be delivered by either of the following two main methods:

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Tallahassee Memorial HealthCare</span> Community healthcare system in the United States

Tallahassee Memorial HealthCare (TMH) is a private, not-for-profit community healthcare system founded in 1948. Located in Tallahassee, Florida, United States and serving a 16-county region in North Florida and South Georgia, TMH comprises a 772-bed acute care hospital, a psychiatric hospital, multiple specialty care centers, three residency programs, 22 affiliated physician practices, and partnerships with Doctors' Memorial Hospital, UF Health, and Weems Memorial Hospital.

Abortion is illegal in El Salvador. The law formerly permitted an abortion to be performed under some limited circumstances, but in 1998 all exceptions were removed when a new abortion law went into effect.

In re A.C., 573 A.2d 1235 (1990), was a District of Columbia Court of Appeals case. It was the first American appellate court case decided against a forced Caesarean section, although the decision was issued after the fatal procedure was performed. Physicians performed a Caesarean section upon patient Angela Carder without informed consent in an unsuccessful attempt to save the life of her baby. The case stands as a landmark in United States case law establishing the rights of informed consent and bodily integrity for pregnant women.

Pregnant patients' rights regarding medical care during the pregnancy and childbirth are specifically a patient's rights within a medical setting and should not be confused with pregnancy discrimination. A great deal of discussion regarding pregnant patients' rights has taken place in the United States.

This is a timeline of reproductive rights legislation, a chronological list of laws and legal decisions affecting human reproductive rights. Reproductive rights are a sub-set of human rights pertaining to issues of reproduction and reproductive health. These rights may include some or all of the following: the right to legal or safe abortion, the right to birth control, the right to access quality reproductive healthcare, and the right to education and access in order to make reproductive choices free from coercion, discrimination, and violence. Reproductive rights may also include the right to receive education about contraception and sexually transmitted infections, and freedom from coerced sterilization, abortion, and contraception, and protection from practices such as female genital mutilation (FGM).

<i>People v. Pointer</i>

People v. Pointer, 151 Cal.App.3d 1128, 199 Cal. Rptr. 357 (1984), is a criminal law case from the California Court of Appeal, First District, is significant because the trial judge included in his sentencing a prohibition on the defendant becoming pregnant during her period of probation. The appellate court held that such a prohibition was outside the bounds of a judge's sentencing authority. The case was remanded for resentencing to undo the overly broad prohibition against conception.

Wrongful birth is a legal cause of action in some common law countries in which the parents of a congenitally diseased child claim that their doctor failed to properly warn of their risk of conceiving or giving birth to a child with serious genetic or congenital abnormalities. Thus, the plaintiffs claim, the defendant prevented them from making a truly informed decision as to whether or not to have the child. Wrongful birth is a type of medical malpractice tort. It is distinguished from wrongful life, in which the child sues the doctor.

Burton v. Florida, 49 So.3d 263 (2010), was a Florida District Court of Appeals case ruling that the court cannot impose unwanted treatment on a pregnant woman "in the best interests of the fetus" without providing evidence of fetal viability.

Fetal abduction refers to the rare crime of child abduction by kidnapping of an at term pregnant woman and extraction of her fetus through a crude cesarean section. Dr. Michael H. Stone and Dr. Gary Brucato have alternatively referred to this crime as "fetus-snatching" or "fetus abduction." Homicide expert Vernon J. Geberth has used the term "fetal kidnapping." In the small number of reported cases, a few pregnant victims and about half of their fetuses survived the assault and non-medically performed cesarean.

Foeticide, or feticide, is the act of killing a fetus, or causing a miscarriage. Definitions differ between legal and medical applications, whereas in law, feticide frequently refers to a criminal offense, in medicine the term generally refers to a part of an abortion procedure in which a provider intentionally induces fetal demise to avoid the chance of an unintended live birth, or as a standalone procedure in the case of selective reduction.

Maternal somatic support after brain death occurs when a brain dead patient is pregnant and their body is kept alive to deliver a fetus. It occurs very rarely internationally. Even among brain dead patients, in a U.S. study of 252 brain dead patients from 1990–96, only 5 (2.8%) cases involved pregnant women between 15 and 45 years of age.

The following timeline represents formal legal changes and reforms regarding women's rights in the United States except voting rights. It includes actual law reforms as well as other formal changes, such as reforms through new interpretations of laws by precedents.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Abortion in South Korea</span>

Abortion in South Korea was decriminalized, effective 1 January 2021, by a 2019 order of the Constitutional Court of Korea. It is currently legal throughout pregnancy, as no new law has been enacted. Thus there are no gestational limits or other restrictions.

Maternal-fetal conflict, also known as obstetric conflict, occurs when a pregnant woman’s (maternal) interests conflict with the interests of the fetus. Legal and ethical considerations involving women's rights and the rights of the fetus as a patient and future child, have become more complicated with advances in medicine and technology. Maternal-fetal conflict can occur in situations where the mother denies health recommendations that can benefit the fetus or make life choices that can harm the fetus. There are maternal-fetal conflict situations where the law becomes involved, but most physicians avoid involving the law for various reasons.

Abortion in Florida is generally illegal after six weeks from the woman's last menstrual period, when many women do not yet know they are pregnant. This law came into effect in May 2024, being approved by Republican Governor Ron DeSantis following its passage in the Florida House of Representatives and the Florida Senate, with only Republican state legislators supporting and only Democratic state legislators opposing. Additionally, pregnant women are generally required to make two visits to a medical facility 24 hours apart to be able to obtain an abortion, in a law approved by Republican Governor Rick Scott in 2015.

<i>Planned Parenthood v. Rounds</i> 2012 US legal decision

Planned Parenthood v. Rounds, 686 F.3d 889, is an Eighth Circuit decision addressing the constitutionality of a South Dakota law which forced doctors to make certain disclosures to patients seeking abortions. The challenged statute required physicians to convey to their abortion-seeking patients a number of state-mandated disclosures, including a statement that abortions caused an "[i]ncreased risk of suicide ideation and suicide." Planned Parenthood of Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, along with its medical director Dr. Carol E. Ball, challenged the South Dakota law, arguing that it violated patients' and physicians' First Amendment free speech rights and Fourteenth Amendment due process rights. After several appeals and remands, the Eighth Circuit, sitting en banc, upheld the South Dakota law, holding that the mandated suicide advisement was not "unconstitutionally misleading or irrelevant," and did "not impose an unconstitutional burden on women seeking abortions or their physicians." This supplemented the Eighth Circuit's earlier rulings in this case, where the court determined that the state was allowed to impose a restrictive emergency exception on abortion procedures and to force physicians to convey disclosures regarding the woman's relationship to the fetus and the humanity of the fetus.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 "Pemberton v. TALLAHASSEE MEMORIAL REGIONAL MEDICAL, 66 F. Supp. 2d 1247 (N.D. Fla. 1999)". Justia Law. Retrieved March 2, 2023.
  2. Kaplan, Margot (2010). ""A Special Class of Persons": Pregnant Women's Right to Refuse Medical Treatment after Gonzalez v. Carhart". Journal of Constitutional Law. 13 via Penn Law Legal Scholarship Repository.
  3. Pratt, Lisa (2013–2014). "Access to Vaginal Birth after Cesarean Section: Restrictive Policies and the Chilling of Women's Medical Rights During Childbirth". William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice. 20: 119.
  4. U.S. District Court, N.D. Florida, Tallahassee Division (1999). "Pemberton v. Tallahassee Memorial Regional Center". West's Federal Supplement. 66: 1247–1257. ISSN   1047-7306. PMID   11868571.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  5. Roth, Louise (2021). The Business of Birth: Malpractice and Maternity Care in the United States. New York: New York University Press. pp. 189–213.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: date and year (link)
  6. "Burton v. State of Florida - ACLU Amicus Brief". American Civil Liberties Union. Retrieved May 24, 2019.
  7. Bonner, Mark; Sheriff, Jennifer (2012–2013). "A Child Needs a Champion: Guardian Ad Litem Representation for Prenatal Children". William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice. 19: 526–530.
  8. Belkin, Lisa. Is Refusing Bed Rest a Crime? The New York Times Jan. 12, 2010
  9. Samantha Burton v. State Of Florida, District Court Of Appeal, First District, State Of Florida, Case No. 1D09-1958. Opinion filed August 12, 2010. John C. Cooper, Judge.