EXEMPTION FROM CIVIL OR CRIMINAL LIABILITY: Does havIing no policies excempt anyone, even a medical person, or a member of the government who was on committees approving harmful or questionable practices from criminal and civil prosecution? Only a judge can determine that when the first attempt for private prosecution begins. This is NOT a witch hunt. People know who have assaulted their child and did not follow natural child birth practices. They know they did not discuss their intentions to clamp the child's umbilical cord, or to conceal the facts of science how much was deprived "their" baby by that needless treatment to "their" baby. They know the hospital staff did not give an informed consent listing the risks of drugs offered to the mother, very vulnerable, very tired of being pregant and not seeing her toes. They know every assaulted child, when it grows up can apply to have the facts known of its care at birth, and that all such records cannot be legally destroyed on a child until it is 7 years, I believe, beyond legal age of being an adult. For any hospital to do that is to do so at their own peril, I would think. The age of the child before records can be destroyed, and they should never be destroyed without consent, is likely 27 years old. Can the mother be named in the civil or criminal application, if she demaned the child to have its umbilical cord clamped immediately? I believe so. Anything is possible. But I would think the medical person had a duty to know better. The duty of all, including the parent, is to the child. I would think that a fundamental duty, not having to be written down.
I do not think blood robbing of babies is protecting the public, but adding costs to our society in future higher costs to repair the latent disorders, to name a few: heart, lung, cancers, learning and behavior problems. If we check the persons having problems, can't get pass an average mark, no matter how hard they study, require special tutoring or private schooling, or even home-schooling, it is best to review the child's birth, to the drugs offered and accepted by the mother to the timing of the clamping of the umbilical cord, to administration of artificial blood, to the need of giving oxygen after the baby was off its natural supply to both.
There, in that review you are going to find the likely root of all diseases, diabetics, thyroid problems, growth problems, sexuality problems, eating and sleeping disorders, blindness, deafness, muscle problems, just to name a few iatrogenic distress disorders all tied in with time efficiency, drugs, injections into the baby, and hasty clamping. NOW you cannot sue for natural process, but you sure can question interventions.
While our duty is to help the person with anyone of these distress disorders to the body and to the mind, there is duty to eliminate the probable cause of them, too. This can be achieved by proper and factual and truthful information given to the males and females about planning for a family, from conception to the child's birth and this long before they are even thinking of their reproduction systems. The saying is, knowledge is power.
It is natural that after the child's birth the uninformed parents are distracted. The parents are either busy with the needs of the baby, looking at its sex, inquiring about the tests being made and why the doctors and nurses have the child in their hands, and not in the hands of the parents. Why are the doctors and the nurses doing rituals on the baby, weighing, measuring...all done, quickly, and after they clamped the baby from its blood flow? All done within moments of the child's entrance to this world. That is NOT done in natural births where the parents are educated to be in control. So we need to take back babybirth and put it in the care of the parents, totally, in most instances.
The parents are not observing this process on the placenta's delivery because they do not know all the facts. They have never studied the baby's placenta in any of their teachings at school. I mean really, really study the placenta and the veins and the arteries and the circulation system. And what is available in some of Biology textbooks, is stated with dogma to cut the human baby off its lifeline quickly at birth. Do vets do that? NOT if they value their own persons when dealing with someone's prized colt? No names of references to that information is given, that I can relate to the instructions to a name, so the author and the publisherare taking responsibility for any false teachings, not based in facts of science that are observable and repeatable today.
After taking a weaker baby home, the parent's still are none-the-wiser that their baby is already likely iron deficient. This is something that will bother the child, likely the rest of his/her life, and if not checked at periods of the child's growth for sufficiency other problems can stem from that. But at the time the parents take the baby home, some hours after its birth in a hospital, they are on their own. Some of the signs of the weaker babies are they don't feed well, and get sick frequently.
The nutrition to the already weakened child now depends on the parent's financial abilities. The okay and surviving child to assault at birth are going to have some kind of latent learning disorders that are sometimes not discovered until the child is of school age. Children not talking are not discovered until after the age of two.