She said: 'When he was born, he put out his arms and legs and pushed himself over.
A midwife said he was breathing and had a strong heartbeat, and described him as a "little fighter".
I kept asking for the doctors but the midwife said, "They won't come and help, sweetie. Make the best of the time you have with him".'
She cuddled her child and took precious photos of him, but he died in her arms less than two hours after his birth.
Miss Capewell, who has a five-year-old daughter Jodie, went into labour in October last year at 21 weeks and four days after suffering problems during her pregnancy.
She said she was told that because she had not reached 22 weeks, she was not allowed injections to try to stop the labour, or a steroid injection to help to strengthen her baby's lungs.
Instead, doctors told her to treat the labour as a miscarriage, not a birth, and to expect her baby to be born with serious deformities or even to be still-born.
She told how she begged one paediatrician, 'You have got to help', only for the man to respond: 'No we don't.'
As her contractions continued, a chaplain arrived at her bedside to discuss bereavement and planning a funeral, she claims.
She said: 'I was sitting there, reading this leaflet about planning a funeral and thinking, this is my baby, he isn't even born yet, let alone dead.'
After his death she even had to argue with hospital officials for her right to receive birth and death certificates, which meant she could give her son a proper funeral.
You can read more here.
You can read Jayden's story here.
Some questions:
-Should an arbitrary date be the determiner of who is treated and who is not?
-Do you agree with the decision made here?
-How should one determine who should get treatment and who should not? Or should the default be that everyone get treatment?
-Thoughts?
No comments:
Post a Comment