ChristiansUnite Forums

Amber Alert issued amid medical dispute
Mother snatched baby from hospital after battling doctors, state over treatment


A statewide Amber Alert was issued for an ill 9-month-old boy smuggled out of a hospital by his mother after a battle with doctors who insist the child needs surgery.

The mother, Tina Carlsen, 34, of Sumner, Wash., wanted to pursue naturopathic treatments for the baby's kidney ailments while doctors contended surgery and dialysis is needed to save the child's life, the Olympian newspaper of Olympia, Wash., reported.

Officials at Children's Hospital and Medical Center in Seattle won a court decision allowing them to overrule the mother's wishes and put the baby, Riley Rogers, in state custody.

But just hours before surgery was scheduled Thursday, Carlsen snatched the baby from the hospital, concealing it in a diaper bag.

Seattle police tracked down the mother Saturday and returned the baby to the hospital.

Carlsen, held in jail on $500,000 bail, has been charged with second-degree domestic violence kidnapping and could face up to a year in jail.

Monday, Pierce County Superior Court Judge John McCarthy authorized the operation, granting a request by Child Protective Services.

The mother's lawyer, Mike Shipley, maintained parents have a right to explore other treatments.

"Just because a doctor says something, doesn't make it so," Shipley told the Olympian.

Child Protective Services' attorney Karen Calhoun argued that while the situation was not an emergency, the baby likely would suffer "a slow-motion death" if he doesn't have dialysis.

When the statewide Amber Alert was issued, however, police said the baby would die "imminently" if not treated.

But the next day, Children's Hospital's medical director, Dr. Richard Molteni, said in a statement: "We do not believe that Riley's health condition puts him in imminent danger."

The doctor said, nevertheless, the baby was "very vulnerable," and a minor change such as a cold could become a "life-threatening situation."

The baby's father, Todd Rogers, agreed to the surgery but said he doesn't have enough information to decide whether the dialysis would be best for his son, according to his attorney, Deborah McFadden.

Commenting on the controversy, Tom McCormick, senior lecturer emeritus in the department of medical history and ethics at the University of Washington, told the Olympia paper that for parents rights to be overruled, the medical situation, in most cases, must be "life-threatening" or likely to grievously impair or cause suffering to a child.

"The threat to a child's life and safety must be imminent," McCormick said.

How imminent the threat is to Riley Rogers is in dispute, the Olympian pointed out.

Dr. Doug Diekema, who sits on the Children's Hospital ethics committee, told the paper he believes the standard was "very clearly met" in this case, contending the boy was in serious danger and the needed procedure was not intensely painful.

"It's a big deal to take a child out of a home and tell parents they can't make decisions for their child," he said. "We have to weigh that, and do everything possible to avoid getting to the point where we seek a court order."