Doctor Allegedly Decapitates Baby during delivery

According to the suit filed against him by the people in the delivery room...he is a monster.

Funny how the *doctor* automatically assumes the doctor didn't do anything wrong, and the mother, witnesses and those who are appalled are the ones who are stupid.

No bias there. No god complex at all.
 
But it's really funny to read the commentary from the lay public on the internet about what a monster this OB/GYN is.
I have to say that you are correct, geaux.

It's best to wait until all the facts are in. Until that time, everything is a hypothetical, and pathos has caused wrongdoing as in the McMartin Nursery scam of the 1980s.

McMartin Preschool
Main article: McMartin preschool trial

The case started in August 1983 when Judy Johnson, the mother of a 2½ year-old boy reported to the police that her son was abused by Raymond Buckey at the McMartin Preschool in Manhattan Beach, California.[1] After seven years of criminal trials, no convictions were obtained, and all charges were dropped in 1990. As of 2006, it is the longest and most expensive criminal trial in the history of the United States.[1] The accusations involved hidden tunnels, killing animals, Satan worship, and orgies.[4] Judy Johnson was diagnosed with acute schizophrenia[5][6] and in 1986 was found dead in her home from complications of chronic alcoholism.[7] Buckey and his mother, Peggy McMartin, were eventually released without any charges. In 2005 one of the testifying children retracted his testimony and said he lied, to protect his younger siblings and to please his parents.

In The Devil in the Nursery in 2001, Margaret Talbot for The New York Times summarized the case:

"When you once believed something that now strikes you as absurd, even unhinged, it can be almost impossible to summon that feeling of credulity again. Maybe that is why it is easier for most of us to forget, rather than to try and explain, the Satanic-abuse scare that gripped this country in the early 80s — the myth that Devil-worshipers had set up shop in our day-care centers, where their clever adepts were raping and sodomizing children, practicing ritual sacrifice, shedding their clothes, drinking blood and eating feces, all unnoticed by parents, neighbors and the authorities."
I can't emphasize too much how it's best to wait for all the facts on the case are out, and if necessary, until what the jury decides has been discovered by hearing details, if it comes to a trial.

In the meantime, people should be considered innocent until proved guilty, and even then, as in the McMartin case, the propagator of the lie was an average-looking woman who had a severe mental illness that was not made obvious to the jury during the trial. A mental illness can make its victim say things that aren't true, then build what seems an unimpeachable paradigm around it that makes other people believe it too. The accused spent over 10 years in prison, wrongfully convicted based on a schizophrenic woman's insistence of caregiver wrongdoing.
 
Last edited:
According to the suit filed against him by the people in the delivery room...he is a monster.

the people in the delivery room? You mean the OB GYN Nurse?

Funny how the *doctor* automatically assumes the doctor didn't do anything wrong, and the mother, witnesses and those who are appalled are the ones who are stupid.

Did he say they were stupid? I don't think he did. Did he say the doctor did nothing wrong? I know he didn't. You are much like the lefties here who wanted to string George Zimmerman up from the nearest tree before even knowing the facts.

There are some things wrong with this story:

1. A 28 weeker had an abdomen that was big enough to get stuck in the birth canal that can usually handle up to 9-10 pound babies.

2. The fact that if the abdomen is stuck then a doctor MUST perform a C-Section in order to deliver the body. Yet everyone claims that it was done to hide his mistake.

3. At a C-Section you have the surgeon, another MD to assist, a scrub nurse, a circulating nurse, a nurse for the infant, and a respiratory therapist. Quite often there is a nurse assistant in the room to help. All thse people were either silent about what happened or didn't notice????

4. A baby's head cannot simply come detached in utero, so his cover story would not have worked.

5. Physicians, at the first sign of trouble, will deliver c-section. They are often criticised for doing so too often. To try to make me believe that a doctor would choose a vaginal delivery in this case is highly unlikely.
 
No, you're wrong. On all counts. The baby was premature...which means not full sized. The woman was scheduled for a c-section at some later date, presumably when the baby was larger. And different women have different sized pelvises. We aren't "one size fits all". I imagine the doctor brushed off her concerns, certain that she would be able to deliver a smaller baby vaginally, and didn't listen to her objections..because he's "the doctor".

The medical staff cannot speak except as they are directed by the court. Everything that happens in a delivery room is confidential and protected under hipa. They won't be blabbing to the news or anyone else until they are subpoenaed for depositions. But my bet is that the attorneys have already talked to at least a couple of them which is why they feel they have a case.

There's no reason the doctor should have removed the baby's head. It shouldn't have happened. And he shouldn't have tried to hide it when he did. The fact that he tried to hide it tells me he knew he fucked up.
 
Last edited:
I have been a medical professional for 30 years now. I have attended the births of over 5000 people. here's what I think happened.

A pregnant mother showed up at the hospital in labor. It was noticed that she was pre-term and a fetal ultrasound was performed. They confirmed that the baby was 28 weeks into gestation and in addition, the baby was diagnosed with ascites. Ascites is a condition where there is an accumulation of fluid in the abdomen. The doctors, in view of the fact that the baby was severely pre-term, were attempting to stop labor. The mom at some point, was told that the only safe method of delivery was through a cesarian section.

At some point later, the mother advanced very quickly into active labor and was probably pushing when she shouldn't have been. When the doctor arrived, he determined that the baby would come before they could get the room ready and the mom moved and prepped for surgery. He attempted the delivery vaginally. The normal procedure in delivering a baby is that once the head is delivered, the doctor grabs it firmly and pulls on it to deliver the shoulders one at a time. This he attempted. When the baby would not move and with the umblilical cord at this time completely compressed by the infant in the birth canal, the doctor knew that it was either deliver the baby now, or the baby dies. A little more pulling, and unfortunately for everyone involved, the head separated from the torso.

At this point, the body and abdomen are stuck with no way to move it and since the baby was already dead, a c-section was warranted.

If the above scenario is correct, and i think it's waaaaaay more likely that what is alleged in the suit, the doctor is not a monster, or a bad physician.

However, in the current climate of our courts, it is probably likely that the jury, if it even gets to court, will award at least something to the parents., but if my scenario is correct, the doctor's license will remain valid.
 
Last edited:
Except in this case, the baby was ultimately delivered (in two pieces) by caesarean.

So obviously, she wasn't too far along for a c-section.
 
No, you're wrong. On all counts.

Wrong? On all counts? Because you say so? Please.

The woman was scheduled for a c-section at some later date, presumably when the baby was larger. And different women have different sized pelvises. We aren't "one size fits all".

Irrelevant.

I imagine the doctor brushed off her concerns, certain that she would be able to deliver a smaller baby vaginally, and didn't listen to her objections..because he's "the doctor".

Of course you imagine this, it fits your narrative. There's no way you can know this, no possible way.

The medical staff cannot speak except as they are directed by the court. Everything that happens in a delivery room is confidential and protected under hipa. They won't be blabbing to the news or anyone else until they are subpoenaed for depositions.

You are right and wrong. You are right in that it's confidential, but that doesn't mean they cannot speak up AT THE TIME of the incident. In fact every nurse knows that if she sees a physician doing something illegal or unethical it is their duty to speak up, they can lose their license to practice nursing. The doctor, even if he was brain-dead enough to even think that his ruse would work, wouldn't get away with it.

You also need to understand that since, as you say, they cannot speak, then that means that we don't know the facts of the case and you have tried and convicted him without known any of the facts in the case. Shame on you.

But my bet is that the attorneys have already talked to at least a couple of them which is why they feel they have a case.

Again you are wrong. Those ambulance chasers know that the more horriffic the story, the more likely they are to get money. They are anticipating that this won't even go to trial. the defence will show them that their case is weak, the complaintant's attourney will point out that he will tell the grisly tale of a baby being decaptitated to the jusy and the jury is bound to award big bucks to the plaintif. A compromise will be reached, the case will be dropped and the parents and their lawyer will come away with some big bucks.

I guarantee it. This happens every day in our courts.

There's no reason the doctor should have removed the baby's head. It shouldn't have happened.

The doctor did not remove the head.

And he shouldn't have tried to hide it when he did. The fact that he tried to hide it tells me he knew he fucked up.

He didn't try to hide it, there's no way he could have hidden it, it's impossible. The c-section was performed because once the head was off, there was no way to deliver the torso.
 
I'm not ignorant of the delivery process at all.

The baby was delivered by cesarean after it's head was yanked off. Obviously the delivery wasn't too far along for a cesarean, or the wonderful doc would have completed the vaginal delivery.
 
I'm not ignorant of the delivery process at all.

The baby was delivered by cesarean after it's head was yanked off. Obviously the delivery wasn't too far along for a cesarean, or the wonderful doc would have completed the vaginal delivery.

Do you know what cord compression is?

Do you know what a fetal monitor is?

Do you know what fetal distress is?

Go ahead and Google them now and then come back and pretend you knew all along. Go ahead.

Your statement is 100% wrong.
 
Yes, I know what all those things are, loon. I have had 4 live deliveries and 1 miscarriage, I've been present at the births of 2 other children, my mother worked all my life as a nurse, my niece is a doctor...we've had some pretty detailed conversations about child birth. Often in the delivery room.
 
Yes, I know what all those things are, loon. I have had 4 live deliveries and 1 miscarriage, I've been present at the births of 2 other children, my mother worked all my life as a nurse, my niece is a doctor...we've had some pretty detailed conversations about child birth. Often in the delivery room.

Well, it doesn't show.

Look, I hate arguing with a fellow conservative when there are plenty of idiotic libs to harrass. I think you should wait to hang the doctor until after the truth comes out, if it ever does.

Gotta go, there are liberals to annoy.
 
According to the suit filed against him by the people in the delivery room...he is a monster.

Funny how the *doctor* automatically assumes the doctor didn't do anything wrong, and the mother, witnesses and those who are appalled are the ones who are stupid.

No bias there. No god complex at all.

Yes, I am sure this doctor, who is board certified in OB/GYN and MFM and has been practicing for 20 years is secretly a monster laying in wait for these poor people to show up until he activated into monster mode.....

I am not automatically assuming anything. I am saying the facts of this story don't make sense to someone who has a slight familiarity (in my case a very slight familiarity) with obstetrics. Pred has been involved with 1000 times more the deliveries and also thinks this sounds strange.

Other then the plaintiffs, you don't know what the witnesses saw. You haven't seen a single deposition or any claim from anyone other than the plaintiffs.

And the people spinning into orbit over plaintiff's allegations are stupid. Sorry, but if you are going to base your opinion on a document prepared solely by trial lawyers, you are stupid. This is why I'll be damned before I ever go to a jury trial. Just settle so that morons never have a chance to mangle basic facts and harm my family.

The cost is just passed on to the customer anyways.

BTW, what degree do you think Missouri's recent repeal of non-economic damages three months ago had in this being filed? It happened over a year ago and all the damages they are claiming are pain and suffering inflicted on he parents for having to go through a vaginal birth and witnessing this poor outcome.

Think hard about that....
 
But it's really funny to read the commentary from the lay public on the internet about what a monster this OB/GYN is.
I have to say that you are correct, geaux.

It's best to wait until all the facts are in. Until that time, everything is a hypothetical, and pathos has caused wrongdoing as in the McMartin Nursery scam of the 1980s.

McMartin Preschool
Main article: McMartin preschool trial

The case started in August 1983 when Judy Johnson, the mother of a 2½ year-old boy reported to the police that her son was abused by Raymond Buckey at the McMartin Preschool in Manhattan Beach, California.[1] After seven years of criminal trials, no convictions were obtained, and all charges were dropped in 1990. As of 2006, it is the longest and most expensive criminal trial in the history of the United States.[1] The accusations involved hidden tunnels, killing animals, Satan worship, and orgies.[4] Judy Johnson was diagnosed with acute schizophrenia[5][6] and in 1986 was found dead in her home from complications of chronic alcoholism.[7] Buckey and his mother, Peggy McMartin, were eventually released without any charges. In 2005 one of the testifying children retracted his testimony and said he lied, to protect his younger siblings and to please his parents.

In The Devil in the Nursery in 2001, Margaret Talbot for The New York Times summarized the case:

"When you once believed something that now strikes you as absurd, even unhinged, it can be almost impossible to summon that feeling of credulity again. Maybe that is why it is easier for most of us to forget, rather than to try and explain, the Satanic-abuse scare that gripped this country in the early 80s — the myth that Devil-worshipers had set up shop in our day-care centers, where their clever adepts were raping and sodomizing children, practicing ritual sacrifice, shedding their clothes, drinking blood and eating feces, all unnoticed by parents, neighbors and the authorities."
I can't emphasize too much how it's best to wait for all the facts on the case are out, and if necessary, until what the jury decides has been discovered by hearing details, if it comes to a trial.

In the meantime, people should be considered innocent until proved guilty, and even then, as in the McMartin case, the propagator of the lie was an average-looking woman who had a severe mental illness that was not made obvious to the jury during the trial. A mental illness can make its victim say things that aren't true, then build what seems an unimpeachable paradigm around it that makes other people believe it too. The accused spent over 10 years in prison, wrongfully convicted based on a schizophrenic woman's insistence of caregiver wrongdoing.

The doctor is stupid if he let's this go to jury. This thread illustrates why. The plaintiffs lawyers know this. There will be a settlement with a non-disclosure agreement and everyone will forget about it.
 
I'm not ignorant of the delivery process at all.

The baby was delivered by cesarean after it's head was yanked off. Obviously the delivery wasn't too far along for a cesarean, or the wonderful doc would have completed the vaginal delivery.

This was a case of shoulder dystocia. The OB managed it correctly. If you can't pass the shoulders after a Robert's or corkscrew, you push the head back in and go to c-section. When you are doing a life saving maneuver, it's ever "too late" to go to section (I.e. peri-mortem c-section).

I highly doubht this doctor transsected a healthy fetuses head in the birth canal. In fact isn't the allegation that he surgically removed it in the OR? I don't know. I can't keep track of he bullshit.
 

Forum List

Back
Top