I’m going to descend to kid-language and say:

“They started it!”

Seriously though, if nurses/hospitals/OBs/midwives/healthcare providers/etc. didn’t try to override mothers so much, no one would even contemplate this as a necessity. What should a person do when they’re going into a VERY vulnerable situation with an already adversarial staff? Complain later? Thanks, I’d rather have a lawyer with me.

I think it’s okay to be adversarial if you’re doing it in response to someone else’s threat. “We’ll have the control once you’re here!” is not respectful of the patient’s rights, and once they’ve laid down the gauntlet, I think it would be foolish not to come in with every possible tool at your disposal to protect your rights.

I don’t understand why adversarial is a bad thing in this context. Attorneys protect the rights of people. If you don’t like your rights protected, that’s your option.
As an attorney, and as a mommy, I read through a whole lot of consent forms and informational forms that my and my children’s doctors want me to sign. A majority of the forms that I am told are merely informational actually contain language that when signed and consented to would lead a judge to believe that the patient consented to many medical procedures, treatments and exams – even prior to anyone knowing there is a need for those.
Likewise, many of the consent forms, when signed and consented to would allow a doctor to completely control your medical care without your consent, no matter how invasive and unnecessary the procedure, treatment or exam is.
I have never seen a form at a doctor’s office that I did not have to change to maintain my right to informed consent or refuse to sign.
I mention consent forms, even before I mention how controlling and pompous some medical staff can be. Anyone who has read this website knows that there are many instances of medical staff misconduct due to god complexes, and the fact that many patients probably sign over their right to informed consent in the papers they sign in their doctor’s office prior to even seeing a doctor or having a known medical condition in need of exam and treatment.
Many patients don’t know their rights, or know they won’t be able to stand up for their rights, but know that they don’t want the medical staff bullying them into procedures while the patient is in a vulnerable position. In this instance, it is perfectly acceptable to want and to have someone either videotaping the medical staff, or to have and advocate present (or both).
Keep in mind, everything the doctor makes you sign before a medical procedure is ONLY to cover his/her butt in the event of something going wrong. It is not to help the patient. Lawyers draft nearly every consent form that your doctor makes you sign. In spite of that, patients don’t have an attorney explain the consequences and the loss of patient’s rights that flows from signing those consent forms.
If you want to consider how adversarial the medical system is, consider all the forms you sign absolving the doctor of liability if a normal procedure goes awry. Consider that doctors lobby for tort reform so they don’t have to pay as much when they royally mess up a procedure, and their patient’s life. Consider how nearly every hospital policy is written by a group of lawyers NOT a doctor, in order to reduce malpractice liability. Those policies that the attorneys draft are not based on science, but are based on the statistical probability that a specific procedure will result in a injury that could be foreseen and mitigated. This is the exact reason that VBACs are difficult to get. It is foreseeable that injury will occur at a higher rate than that of mothers without a prior cesarean, a cesarean is considered “standard practice in the community” (that is medical community – evidence that ‘all the other doctors are doing it this way’ can absolve the doctor from much liability), a cesarean can mitigate the risks of a VBAC. You say, but the cesarean has risks of its own. The reason lawyers prefer a doctor to perform a cesarean is that principle above of “all the other doctors are doing it”.
I’m not saying your doctor is evil for not wanting to give a VBAC, I’m saying your doctor is told what procedures will and won’t be covered under his/her malpractice insurance, and that influences his/her decision on what procedures he/she will perform. The doctor’s own lawyers dictate the medical care you receive.
Has it occurred to you that this adversarial system is the result of doctors having a posse of lawyers in their corner, and not a result of a patient wanting anything more than his/her rights respected?

I agree. But if the hospital comes off as “we’ll stick to our standard procedures and ride over anyone who wants something different” then it’s hard not to want to fight back. Most hospitals at least make an attempt to be accommodating. This one seems to have missed the memo…
I could see just introducing the lawyer as a ‘friend’, and outing him as the lawyer if it becomes necessary.

I don’t understand why adversarial is a bad thing in this context. Attorneys protect the rights of people. If you don’t like your rights protected, that’s your option.
As an attorney, and as a mommy, I read through a whole lot of consent forms and informational forms that my and my children’s doctors want me to sign. A majority of the forms, that I am told are merely informational, actually contain language that when signed and consented to would lead a judge to believe that the patient consented to many medical procedures, treatments and exams – even prior to anyone knowing there is a need for those.
Likewise, many of the consent forms, when signed and consented to, would allow a doctor to completely control your medical care without your consent – no matter how invasive and unnecessary the procedure, treatment or exam is.
I have never seen a form at a doctor’s office that I did not have to change to maintain my right to informed consent or refuse to sign.
Anyone who has read this website knows that there are many instances of medical staff misconduct and misinterpretation of the law. However, many patients sign away their right to informed consent by failing to read before signing the papers they are given in their doctor’s office prior to even seeing a doctor or having a known medical condition in need of exam and treatment.
Many patients don’t know their rights, or know they won’t be able to stand up for their rights under certain conditions, but know that they don’t want the medical staff bullying them into procedures while the patient is in a vulnerable position. In this instance, it is perfectly acceptable to want and to have someone either videotaping the medical staff, or to have and advocate present (or both).
Keep in mind, everything the doctor makes you sign before a medical procedure is ONLY to cover his/her butt in the event of something going wrong. It is not to help the patient. Lawyers draft nearly every consent form that your doctor makes you sign before a procedure. In spite of that, patients don’t have an attorney explain the consequences and the loss of patient’s rights that flows from signing those consent forms.
If you want to consider how adversarial the medical system is, consider all the forms you sign absolving the doctor of liability if a normal procedure goes awry. Consider that doctors lobby for tort reform so they don’t have to pay as much when they royally mess up a procedure, and their patient’s life. Consider how nearly every hospital policy is written by a group of lawyers NOT a doctor, in order to reduce malpractice liability. Those policies that the attorneys draft are not based on science, but are based on the statistical probability that a specific procedure will result in a injury that could be foreseen and mitigated. This is the exact reason that VBACs are difficult to get. It is foreseeable that injury will occur at a higher rate than that of mothers without a prior cesarean, a cesarean is considered “standard practice in the community” (that is medical community – evidence that ‘all the other doctors are doing it this way’ can absolve the doctor from much liability), a cesarean can mitigate the risks of a VBAC. You say, but the cesarean has risks of its own. The reason lawyers prefer a doctor to perform a cesarean is that principle above of “all the other doctors are doing it”.
Doctors are not necessarily evil for not performing some procedures (e.g. a VBAC), but doctors are told what procedures will and won’t be covered under his/her malpractice insurance. That influences the doctor’s decision on what procedures he/she will perform. In other words: the doctor’s own lawyers dictate the medical care you receive.
Has it occurred to you that this adversarial system is the result of doctors having a posse of lawyers in their corner, and not a result of a patient wanting anything more than his/her rights respected?

I don’t understand why adversarial is a bad thing in this context. Attorneys protect the rights of people. If you don’t like your rights protected, that’s your option.
As an attorney, and as a mommy, I read through a whole lot of consent forms and informational forms that my and my children’s doctors want me to sign. A majority of the forms, that I am told are merely informational, actually contain language that when signed and consented to would lead a judge to believe that the patient consented to many medical procedures, treatments and exams – even prior to anyone knowing there is a need for those.
Likewise, many of the consent forms, when signed and consented to, would allow a doctor to completely control your medical care without your consent – no matter how invasive and unnecessary the procedure, treatment or exam is.
I have never seen a form at a doctor’s office that I did not have to change to maintain my right to informed consent or refuse to sign.
Anyone who has read this website knows that there are many instances of medical staff misconduct and misinterpretation of the law. However, many patients sign away their right to informed consent by failing to read before signing the papers they are given in their doctor’s office prior to even seeing a doctor or having a known medical condition in need of exam and treatment.
Many patients don’t know their rights, or know they won’t be able to stand up for their rights under certain conditions, but know that they don’t want the medical staff bullying them into procedures while the patient is in a vulnerable position. In this instance, it is perfectly acceptable to want and to have someone either videotaping the medical staff, or to have and advocate present (or both). (cont)