Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / General / General / July 2008

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Why would you autopsy an aborted fetus?   TWICE

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
metspitzer - 22 Jul 2008 20:35 GMT
LOS ANGELES -- A woman has settled her lawsuit against Los Angeles
County involving the disposal of her infant daughter as "bio-waste"
after she had an abortion.

36-year-old Yolanda Garnett filed the negligence lawsuit September 25,
2007 in Los Angeles Superior Court.

The lawsuit stated Garnett had asked the Coroner's office to return
her daughter's body for burial after an autopsy was performed but was
told the aborted fetus was deemed bio-waste and thrown out.

According to court papers filed by attorneys for the county, Garnett
underwent an abortion on Feb. 20, 2006 at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center
when her fetus was 23 weeks old.

Because the second of two autopsies showed the fetus' death was caused
by an abortion, a death certificate could not be created and a burial
or cremation permit could not be issued, according to the county of
Los Angeles.

"Under those circumstances the remains could not be released to the
next of kin, so the fetal remains were disposed of as a specimen per
Department of Coroner policy," the county's court papers state.

The terms of the settlement were not divulged in a notice of
settlement document filed with the court July 9 by Garnett's lawyer,
J. Barry Moses.

Garnett decided to terminate the pregnancy because of her doctor's
opinion that the baby would be born with severe birth defects,
according to Moses.

http://ktla.trb.com/news/ktla-abortion-lawsuit,0,4716326.story
bae@cs.toronto.no-uce.edu - 25 Jul 2008 17:27 GMT
The first autopsy was no doubt to determine the cause of the severe
birth defects.  Whether or not they had a genetic origin would affect
the woman's decision whether to attempt another pregnancy, and perhaps
whether her close relatives might benefit from screening as well.

My guess is that the second autopsy was a legal requirement due to the
abortion occurring so late in gestation, to confirm that it was
justified.

This is a very tragic story.  To lose a pregnancy to miscarriage at
such an advanced stage is a terrible blow.  To agree to an abortion
of a doomed fetus at that stage might be even worse.  Then to have
the lost baby's remains disposed of as "bio-waste" despite a request
that they be honored as those of a stillborn child must have seemed
extraordinarily cruel to this poor woman.  I suspect her goal in
suing might have been to prevent similar treatment of other women in
future.

>LOS ANGELES -- A woman has settled her lawsuit against Los Angeles
>County involving the disposal of her infant daughter as "bio-waste"
[quoted text clipped - 29 lines]
>
>http://ktla.trb.com/news/ktla-abortion-lawsuit,0,4716326.story
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.