In Re A.C. - Court Proceedings

Court Proceedings

In the wake of the surgery, Carder’s family and the American Civil Liberties Union’s Reproductive Freedom Project asked the D.C. Court of Appeals to vacate the order and its legal precedent, on grounds that the order had violated Carder's right to informed consent and her constitutional rights of privacy and bodily integrity. One hundred and twenty organizations joined amicus briefs on Carder’s behalf, including the American Medical Association and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Only two groups defended the forced surgery. One of them was the Americans United for Life. The other was the United Catholic Conference, now known as the USCCB. The USCCB filed an amicus brief arguing that the lower court's decision to force Angela to undergo surgery that was likely to and did contribute to her death, was "the correct choice." The USCCB has never repudiated their position in this case. One attorney for the hospital argued that it was appropriate to sacrifice a dying woman for her fetus; an appeals court judge is reported to have replied, "Are you urging this court to find that you can handcuff a woman to a bed and force her to give birth?" On April 26, 1990, the court issued the ruling In re A.C., which vacated the previous decisions and ruled that Angela Carder had the right to make health-care decisions for herself and her fetus.

At the same time as the Court of Appeals case, the ACLU and Carder’s parents, Daniel and Nettie Stoner, instituted a civil action, Stoners v. George Washington University Hospital, et al., suing the hospital for deprivation of human rights, discrimination, wrongful death and malpractice, among other charges. In November 1990, days before the scheduled trial was to begin, the hospital settled out of court for an undisclosed amount of money and a promise of new hospital policies protecting the rights of pregnant women.