View Full Version : Pregnant woman banned from a hospital because she is "too fat"
Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!
bsheets
Wed, Feb-20-08, 20:13
Lisa Grave may have to travel to country for birth
Peter Rolfe
January 20, 2008
Herald Sun Australia
A PREGNANT woman banned from a Melbourne Hospital because she is "too fat" says she will have to find $10,000 or travel to country Victoria to give birth.
Lisa Grave claimed Casey Hospital discriminated against big people after she was turned away for weighing 100kg.
The Berwick mother of one, 26, faces a 60km drive to Warragul to have her second baby.
Otherwise she must pay at least $10,000 for a private hospital or drive 40 minutes to Dandenong Hospital where there is no midwife.
Mrs Grave, who stands 167cm, was shocked the Southern Health-run hospital was so blunt.
"The midwife said, 'You're too overweight to come here'," she said.
"I asked her why and she said, 'I don't make the rules, I just follow them'."
With less than five months until she gave birth, Mrs Grave was shattered.
"I've always had a problem with weight, but they don't know what I've been through," she said.
"To tell me this when I'm pregnant isn't fair."
Casey Hospital refused to say how many people it turned away.
Source: http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,23076979-24331,00.html
2cute4u_04
Wed, Feb-20-08, 21:07
thats just rude. that means she weighs around 220 pounds and is about 5'4.
KvonM
Wed, Feb-20-08, 21:09
if there was ever a time for an ambulance-chasing lawyer, it's now.
my cousin just gave birth to twins. she is a VERY big girl... as in over 6' tall and probably about 280lbs. she's also one of the most feminine, "girly" girls you'll ever meet. the doctors originally told her that she wasn't allowed to gain any weight during her pregnancy.
i just about flipped when i heard that. i had twins too (mine were fraternal, hers were identical), and my doctors told me i HAD to gain weight in order to ensure they were healthy.
one of her twins had had renal problems all the way through gestation. he had almost no amniotic fluid around him and the doctors were fairly certain his kidneys either never developed or simply stopped functioning. he lived for 6 hours, 2 minutes before being pronounced officially dead.
his brother is doing fine, with the typical issues most preemies face.
so it really pisses me off when hospitals pull idiotic stunts like this on pregnant women.
mermaiden9
Wed, Feb-20-08, 21:33
As igonorant as this makes me sound, I am shocked that this goes on in Australia. I really thought we had anti-discrimination laws in place for this kind of thing.
I don't understand how they can get away with it. Perhaps they would argue that she is a higher risk but in my opinion this should mean she has even higher priority for public hospital care.
If something were to happen to this woman or her baby, I would expect the hospital could be sued for refusing her care.
I am really blown away. I thought everyone had the right to medical care in a public hospital. Isn't that what the medicare system is in place for?
I just don't understand how this is legally (and morally) possible.
deirdra
Wed, Feb-20-08, 21:36
She's just under 5'6"! I'm sure there are lots of pregnant woman in North America who weigh 220 lbs!
bsheets
Wed, Feb-20-08, 21:40
I am really blown away. I thought everyone had the right to medical care in a public hospital. Isn't that what the medicare system is in place for?
I just don't understand how this is legally (and morally) possible.
Maybe they're 'full' so are turning people away for all sorts of reasons.....?
I dunno. At least that would slightly justify it.
mermaiden9
Wed, Feb-20-08, 21:48
Maybe they're 'full' so are turning people away for all sorts of reasons.....?
That's possible but it doesn't explain the statement made by the midwife..
"The midwife said, 'You're too overweight to come here'," she said.
"I asked her why and she said, 'I don't make the rules, I just follow them'."
It's just unbelievable.
rightnow
Wed, Feb-20-08, 22:00
This is the inevitable end to socialized medicine, in print.
***
I gave birth to my daughter when I was 320 lbs.
PJ
LessLiz
Thu, Feb-21-08, 00:56
This is the most appalling, irrational thing I've read posted here or anywhere else on the web.
AussieTonz
Thu, Feb-21-08, 01:06
I was so in disbelief that this could happen here in Australia that I googled it to see if it was a prank article! But no it is true, however I also found that Casey is a low risk birthing centre, it doesn't have facilities for complications so they don't accept planned high risk deliveries that could put Mum or Bub at risk when there is a safer alternative in a reasonable commute.
bsheets
Thu, Feb-21-08, 03:57
however I also found that Casey is a low risk birthing centre, it doesn't have facilities for complications so they don't accept planned high risk deliveries
Gotta love those half-truths newspapers give us :thdown:
Wifezilla
Thu, Feb-21-08, 08:06
Pj...you are so correct.
As for the risk factor...isn't having to drive so far while full term if you are high risk a HIGHER RISK?
Michelle H
Thu, Feb-21-08, 10:02
Gotta love those half-truths newspapers give us :thdown:
Is the Hearald Sun a reputable newspaper? The whole article is written "sensationally" with phrases like "just 5 months" implying urgency. Don't forget those that write the news aren't too interested in the facts, just selling their product. Mike Eades had an intersting comment on the media a few months ago. I also read some British research that said facts are checked on about 20% of stories.
KvonM
Thu, Feb-21-08, 11:07
I was so in disbelief that this could happen here in Australia that I googled it to see if it was a prank article! But no it is true, however I also found that Casey is a low risk birthing centre, it doesn't have facilities for complications so they don't accept planned high risk deliveries that could put Mum or Bub at risk when there is a safer alternative in a reasonable commute.
how is being 220lbs "high risk"??? the woman in question is also already halfway through her pregnancy... how much did she weigh to begin with?
if she's already dealing with a multitude of pregnancy-related issues that send her into the high-risk category, then i could understand being turned away. if that were me, i'd WANT to be in a hospital that was equipped to handle any problems. but i'd raise holy hell over being turned away for having a perfectly normal, healthy pregnancy and having someone assume i'm high risk because of my weight.
technically, i had a high-risk pregnancy because i had twins. but through the whole thing, i never once experienced high blood pressure, gestational diabetes, or overly high blood-chemistry levels on anything. full-term for twins is 36 weeks... i took the lizards to 38 weeks, and the only reason i didn't go the full 40 weeks of a singleton pregnancy was that my blood chemistry levels started to creep slightly above the normal midline. my midwife said "you're done... they've cooked enough." they took me into the operating room to deliver... the funny thing was that one of the nurses commented that because of the LACK of problems, "we could have done this in the birthing room".
Dodger
Thu, Feb-21-08, 11:50
I did a quick Google search and found numerous articles/papers that indicate that an increased BMI is linked to pregnancy and delivery problems.
I may be that the hospital has a BMI value that the woman exceeded. If the hospital feels that anyone above that BMI is at an increased risk that they cannot handle, then they certainly should recommend that she go to a medical center that is better equipped to handle the pregnancy and delivery.
RobinB
Thu, Feb-21-08, 12:03
That is terrible to hear.
bsheets
Thu, Feb-21-08, 14:27
Is the Hearald Sun a reputable newspaper? The whole article is written "sensationally" with phrases like "just 5 months" implying urgency.
The Herald Sun would probably be the main newspaper of Melbourne, and The Age would come second (unfortunately). They are well known for "peppering" some articles to make them sound more dramatic, but I guess you just get used to it. I remember watching ACA once (I'm sure you'd have to have that in NZ?) and the narrator said "only 50% were [whatever it was] but half were [whatever]!!" and for some reason my brain clicked in and I had a good giggle at the show over it.
rightnow
Thu, Feb-21-08, 16:44
My erroneous understanding was that it was a financial reason, much like in the UK now people are being turned down for needed surgeries due to too-high BMI. I didn't realize the hospital was a specialty hospital. That is different. It might be inappropriate for her to use a nearer hospital which is not equipped for complications.
PJ
bsheets
Thu, Feb-21-08, 17:42
I didn't realize the hospital was a specialty hospital. That is different.
Strangley enough according to their website this hospital does take some higher risk cases, Level 2, and also prides itself on their state-of-the-art equipment.
Copyright 2000-2008 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
vBulletin, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.