A judge, Mr Justice Mostyn, allowed doctors to perform a caesarean section on mother Alessandra Pacchieri to avoid further mental health risks and birth complications. An interim care order was then granted and the baby has been in care since.
Many could say that this fear of Mental health has now gone too far and that the basic right to our own bodies and decisions are being compromised. In what fair world would a baby be snatched straight from a mother’s womb without so much of a chance for her to prove that she can care for it? However it can be argued that the doctors only took the necessary steps to protect a baby and its mother. In reality Ms Pacchieri needed incredibly powerful medication to naturally deliver the baby and the NHS Trust believed that this would cause unnecessary risks to both herself (through risk of rupture) and the baby and so made a decision to ask the High Court for permission to deliver the baby by C-section. Usually doctors must abide by the wishes of the patient, however in this situation it was deemed that Ms Pacchieri lacked capacity and so could not make her own informed decisions. This prompted the NHS Trust to apply to the High Court to have the C-section performed. Therefore it may not be so fair as to hold the NHS Trust in such a negative light for this isolated incident.
Also, although at first the decision to put the new-born into care after the health services performed the caesarean seems highly un-just, it has to be considered that social services acting in the best interests of the baby in ensuring that no risks are taken where the care of children are concerned. In the past there have been some serious holes in the system leaving cases like Baby P and Victoria Climbié to set a terrible example. If the services allowed Miss Pacchieri to deliver the baby naturally under risk of physical and mental health, there could have been serious consequences. If this were permitted the public would perhaps become even more outraged than they are in the current situation. It may be useful to consider that situations like this are often exaggerated and warped by the press; one headline quoted ‘operate on this mother so that we can take her baby’ (Christopher Booker – Sunday Telegraph) going on to imply that the whole situation happened quickly, inefficiently and without any considerations what so ever. In reality both mother and baby were fully represented in proceedings and their welfare would have been the Court’s primary consideration.
The approved judgement for the issues discussed can be accessed by clicking the link below.
http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/media/judgments/2013/re-aa-approved-judgement