A young woman who underwent a court-approved elective Caesarean section against her will has given birth to a healthy baby girl, the High Court president has been told.
The elective procedure, which required administering a general anaesthetic, was carried out earlier this month under detailed plans outlined to the court.
In early July, when the woman was 35 weeks pregnant, Mr Justice David Barniville made orders, permitting the procedure and other medical interventions.
These were necessary to vindicate the woman’s constitutional rights to life, bodily integrity and equality, while the interests of the unborn child also benefitted, he said.
Stealth sackings: why do employers fire staff for minor misdemeanours?
Michael Harding: I went to the cinema to see Small Things Like These. By the time I emerged I had concluded the film was crap
Look inside: 1950s bungalow transformed into modern five-bed home in Greystones for €1.15m
‘I’m in my early 30s and recently married - but I cannot imagine spending the rest of my life with her’
The woman who is in her early 20s, was deemed by medical professionals to lack the capacity to make safe decisions about her health and obstetric care due to a delusional disorder. She is detained at a psychiatric unit under the Mental Health Act.
The woman “consistently declined” basic antenatal care and many routine medical checks, such as blood pressure monitoring. She also disclosed she consumed alcohol, cocaine and crack cocaine during her pregnancy and said she is a victim of sexual assault, the court heard.
On Friday counsel for the Health Service Executive (HSE), Donal McGuinness, said the surgery went ahead and the woman delivered a healthy baby girl.
The new mother was admitted to intensive care after the delivery, as had been intended by the plan, he said. While the woman has continued to refuse many health tests, medical staff managed to carry out some checks that returned appropriate results, the court heard.
Mr McGuinness said the High Court’s inherent jurisdiction was required in relation to the woman’s obstetric care and safe delivery of her child. Her psychiatric treatment and detention in a mental health unit is governed by the Mental Health Act, so the HSE no longer needed the High Court’s involvement, he said.
Solicitor Bernadette Parte, who was appointed by the court to act as the woman’s guardian, said the woman was in a “rather distressed state” after the birth and could not understand why she was in so much pain around her stomach area.
She continued to have a preoccupation with her belief she lost a lot of blood and needed it to be returned, said Ms Parte. The solicitor explained to her that the court might no longer be involved in her care, to which the woman said she did not need anything from the court as she had her Caesarean section and that was enough.
Mr Justice Barnville said he was pleased to hear the woman gave birth to a healthy baby while experiencing only minor complications that seem to have resolved.
He struck out the case.
In making “far-reaching” orders earlier this month, the judge said the evidence was that the elective intervention was in the woman’s best interests.
He was told clinicians felt it was not possible to carry out a natural birth or to use intramuscular medication, instead of general anaesthetic, due to the unpredictability of such a situation and the possibility the woman would not co-operate with life-saving medical advice.
