On Sept. 9, 2024, as Cherise Doyley entered her 12th hour of labor at University of Florida Health in downtown Jacksonville, staff rolled a tablet to her bedside and a judge appeared on the screen. Hospital lawyers and the state attorney had convened an emergency hearing over whether doctors could perform a cesarean delivery despite her objections. Doyley, a professional birth doula who had already undergone three C‑sections, told everyone present she did not want another operation. Later that night, she was taken into surgery while her newborn was transferred to the neonatal intensive care unit on breathing support.
As reported by ProPublica, the hospital sought a court order and Judge Michael Kalil said the state had filed an emergency petition "in the interest of her unborn child." He allowed Doyley to continue laboring but ruled that if an emergency arose, the hospital could operate, an outcome advocates say effectively hands clinical power to judges.
A similar bedside proceeding unfolded in March 2023 at Tallahassee Memorial Hospital, when Brianna Bennett resisted another repeat C‑section and hospital staff contacted the state attorney. He wrote that he planned to file "an emergency motion with the court to allow TMH to take whatever steps medically necessary to protect the life of the child and mother." Bennett later told reporters that doctors, lawyers and a judge crowded into her room via a tablet and that she felt panicked. The judge ordered a cesarean and doctors performed the surgery, according to WLRN.
Doctors, ethics and professional guidance
The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists says a decisionally capable pregnant person's refusal of recommended treatment should be respected and that "the use of coercion is not only ethically impermissible." ACOG also discourages institutions from turning to courts or threats to compel care.
State law and the fetal‑personhood fight
Lawmakers in Tallahassee have repeatedly introduced measures that would let families sue for the wrongful death of an "unborn child," and critics say such statutes could create legal incentives for more court interventions in childbirth. Coverage of the 2026 legislative session, as reported by WGCU, notes bills like SB 164 have drawn opposition from medical groups, insurers and reproductive‑rights advocates worried about a chilling effect on clinicians.
How common are C‑sections and how risky is VBAC?
Cesarean deliveries account for roughly a third of births in the U.S., according to federal vital‑statistics data from the National Center for Health Statistics. Clinical reviews show the risk of uterine rupture during a trial of labor after prior cesarean ranges roughly from 0.15% to 2.3% depending on induction and other factors, numbers clinicians say they weigh when counseling patients and preparing for emergencies (NCHS; systematic review).
Legal implications and racial‑equity questions
Legal experts tell reporters these bedside hearings reflect a long, inconsistent line of rulings in which courts have sometimes prioritized fetal interests over pregnant people's autonomy. "All of it essentially is about the state's ability to decide that a fetus, at any point during a pregnancy, is more important than the person who's pregnant," one law professor told ProPublica, and advocates point out the recent cases involved Black women and say bias and distrust play into who gets pushed into court.
Advocates, ethicists and some medical groups are calling for clearer rules to protect patient autonomy and avoid traumatic bedside hearings while lawmakers debate whether new statutes will expand or restrain judicial power. As WLRN reported, the fights unfolding in Tallahassee and in hospital rooms across the state could determine whether judges or birthing people make the final call on how babies are delivered.
