Answer

Maternity Health

Angela Carder was a 20-year-old married woman who was about 26-weeks pregnant. She have lived with cancer since when she was 13-years-old when she was diagnosed with cancer. The pregnancy was planned and she was on remission for about two years before she got pregnant. She was determined to give birth to her child. She was in good health during her early pregnancy period until the 25^th week of pregnancy when she was diagnosed of a tumor in her lung at George Washington University Hospital.

            The physicians in the Hospital established that her condition was terminal and she was to die within a few weeks. At about 0400hrs on June 15, 1987 she was informed that she was likely to die much sooner than earlier predicted. She accepted to get treatment to get her beyond 28 weeks of pregnancy since her fetus had a better chance of surviving at 28^th week of pregnancy. However, she stressed that her comfort and care should be of primary concern. Angela’s mother, her husband, and physician agreed to keep her comfortable as much as possible as she died (Center for Practical Bioethics, 2021).

            On the morning of June 15, 1987 University’s outside counsel asked a judge to visit the hospital to help in making of a decision on what to do considering Angela’s wellbeing and that of the fetus. A hearing was then convened at the University Hospital that comprised of a legal counsel for the hospital, Angela and her fetus. The lawyers focused on the fetus in complete disregard of Angela’s wishes. Angela’s best interests were not honored or protected. The judge ruled that since Angela was to die in about 24 to 48 hours, the fetus was to be given an opportunity to live. The judge agreed for a cesarean section to be conducted (Center for Practical Bioethics, 2021).

            The doctor who was to perform the cesarean section talked with Angela about the judge’s decision and informed her that a cesarean section was to be done. The doctor was persistent to inform her that a cesarean section could not have been done without her informed consent. Angela put clearly in her speech that she did not wanted to have a cesarean section to be done on her. The judge was informed about Angela’s refusal to give an informed consent. However, the judge was stuck on his original order. An appeal was filed but it was finally denied by the judge. As a result, the cesarean section was conducted and the nonviable fetus died about two hours later and on the other hand, Angela died two days later (Center for Practical Bioethics, 2021). Angela’s acceptance to receive treatment to increase her chance of getting her fetus up to 28 weeks of pregnancy could have been honored. Besides, she had a right to refuse to give informed consent and that should have been honored by anyone including the judge. It was ethically wrong to perform cesarean section against her will (Biros, 2018). Judge’s decision to focus on the fetus and disregard Angela’s wishes let to loss of both the fetus and Angela as well.