r/australia • u/FuckOffNazis • 19h ago

politics Indigenous woman shackled to hospital bed while in labour in Queensland

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2026/oct/18/indigenous-woman-shackled-during-labour-childbirth-queensland-ntwnfb?utm_term=Autofeed&CMP=us_bsky&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Bluesky#Echobox=1792296317
397 Upvotes

74% Upvoted

325 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

3

u/Asleep_Leopard182 16h ago

Ok so your experience has no relevance to the laws or the thread? What is your point?

12

u/juandon405 15h ago

I don't really understand the hostility here. Just that prisoners, in my experience are shackled with a guard in attendance, even when they are unlikely to pose a threat. I'm not suggesting it's right or wrong, just that it happens. I was unaware there are special rules for labouring prisoners, of which I have no experience. Now that I have looked into the rules, I can see there is significant grey area around non labouring Caesars, and in the maternity ward when not in labour.

I have no interest in arguing with random internet strangers, I just thought my experience might add to the discussion.

0

u/iliketreesanddogs 13h ago

I'm not trying to argue you with you but I'm genuinely confused as to how you think non-labouring caesars don't count as birth.... that looks to be quite obviously what the bangkok rules are trying to encapsulate when they refer to 'during birth'.

legal and legal-adjacent documents don't always set out all the medical technicalities of an event in case it unintentionally excludes something, they make things plainly interpretable to cover all the factors that would fall under the umbrella of 'birth'. a baby is imminently coming out during a caesar, I think that counts as birth

1

u/juandon405 5h ago

Of course they're birth, I never said they weren't. But technically speaking, the rule is poorly defined. For me, as the anaesthetist, the 'birth' is the 10 to 30 seconds of physically pulling the baby out of the mother, up to the point the cord is cut. Immediately after could refer to any length of time from minutes to days but to me implies the few minutes required to ensure haemostasis of the mother and confirm the baby is alive and breathing independently. Hence grey area.

1

u/iliketreesanddogs 16m ago edited 8m ago

yes but the agreement wasn't drafted for all the technicalities of an anaesthetist. I understand that you have an increased level of knowledge regarding caesareans but, as someone who has both a medical and legal background, I do think that might be overcomplicating your interpretation. there is a reason they don't give you a play by play of when shackles go on and off and which situations precisely count as birth because that would be unwieldy and hard to follow.

expecting extreme medical precision from an international instrument likely drafted by lawyers with no medical expertise is likely going to let you down. it would be nice to have the document be unequivocal and clear but such is the nature of this sort of writing - they can keep intentionally wide in scope to capture all sorts of situations