A suitable case for treatment?

by R.W. Steele

Ben and Janet M. are a happily married couple who live in Wellington. They're in their middle thirties and have two children There's only one problem that sometimes crops up, and that's Janet's unstable mental health. She is a sensitive, intelligent woman, has a science degree, and plenty to occupy her time. But occasionally she suffers from schizophrenia, and is susceptible to mental breakdown.

One such breakdown occurred earlier this year, when her father died. She was extremely close emotionally to her father, and became very upset when she heard of his death. She went up north to the family home and stayed there for some time, but couldn't adjust to suddenly having no father. As if to escape from reality, she broke down mentally. She would wake up in the middle of the night, wake her children up, and talk gibberish to them. She wouldn't eat, and it became harder and harder to communicate with her.

Eventually the family could stand it no longer and rang Mr M. in Wellington, where he had returned to work. He flew up and got her, then brought her back down to Wellington. On the plane and at the airport she would hang onto him, afraid that people were trying to kill her.

She didn't improve back in Wellington, couldn't speak, lived in fear, so she was taken to the family doctor. He recommended that she be admitted into the psychiatric unit of the hospital, which she duly was.

The psychiatrist's diagnosed affective schizophrenia and gave her electro-convulsive treatment — shock treatment. It seemed to work initially, and she began to recover fairly quickly. Soon she was allowed out, and began to resume her normal life. Then she began to get spells of vomiting. When she went to the family doctor to find out why, she found she ' was pregnant.

She didn't want another baby. She and her husband had enough on their hands with two children, and they realised that pregnancy and the eventual baby would be just the thing to make her regress into mental breakdown again.

In fact, that is what she started to do, With her mental condition worsening, she and her husband went to the family doctor. They had made up their minds that she had to have an abortion. The doctor must have agreed, because he suggested that she could go to the Auckland Clinic and present her case to them.

At about the same time, Mrs M returned to Wellington Hospital for a check-up. There she made it clear to the doctor that she wanted an abortion, desperately. He refused to give his assent to this, claiming that if she had an abortion she might retrogress.

Never mind the fact that she was retrogressing already, and would get worse the more pregnant she got. Never mind the fact that once she had the baby the pressure; on her would be likely to be more than she could bear.

Not only did this doctor refuse to recommend her for an abortion, he also told her that if she did decide to go through with it and have an abortion and if she did retrogress, she was not to come back to Wellington Hospital and she was not to see him.

Needless to say Mrs M. and her husband were extremely upset by the doctor's attitude. They considered that his remarks about her not being able to come back To the hospital constituted a threat. And, of course, it was an assault on their right to choose whether or not they wanted and felt able to have the baby.

Mr and Mrs M. believe that this man, this doctor, who happens to be a Catholic, is forcing his own moral prejudices on them. They believe this because they have had extensive experience of him, and because he could not produce real reasons for denying the abortion, only prejudice. Their opinion has been confirmed by other members of the medical profession. They are very upset that a professional man, and for that matter a 'public servant' can be so poisoned by his religious principles to do other than recommend an abortion on purely therapeutiegrounds. This doctor has gone further than this of course, and threatened to deny Mrs M. access to the public hospital system.

She wanted the abortion enough to keep trying. She saw an obstetrician and gynaecologist who confirmed she had a good case. But when a committee finally met to decide her case they turned her down. Partly on grounds that on the particular day she saw them, her mental health wasn't too bad, but mainly it was on the grounds that by the time they got round to seeing her, it was too late to perform the abortion safely.

Now she has only herself and her husband to turn to. They have to face a pregnancy, and eventually a baby that will bring on pressures they may very well be not able to cope with.