English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In the Irish High Court case of Health Service Executive v B, it was held that a competent woman could not be forced to have a caesarean section against her will notwithstanding the fact that her refusal increased the risk of injury and death to both her and her unborn child.1 This case is of particular interest since it is the first reported case on caesarean section refusal in Ireland. This commentary provides a critical analysis of the judgment, focusing on aspects of the law on informed consent and the way in which the judge reached the conclusion that an order for an enforced caesarean section should not be made. It is argued that, while the outcome can be justified, the reasoning appears at times to be unpersuasive.

Caesarean Section Refusal in the Irish Courts: Health Service Executive v B