A jury ultimately convicted her and she recently appeared for sentencing before Judge Stephen Clark, who said he sympathised with her about experiencing delays but that her actions put her baby in danger.
‘You were swearing and yelling’
On February 6, 2023, the woman took her son to Waikato Hospital because he had breathing difficulties.
The boy was admitted about 3.30pm, and at 5.30pm a doctor diagnosed him as suffering from day one bronchialitis.
“When the doctor assessed [him] you didn’t engage well with the doctor,” the judge said.
“You were not prepared to give answers about [him] ... in fact you disengaged and said, ‘f*** this’, and left the ED.”
The baby was checked by nurses at 7.30pm and 8.30pm, and eventually admitted to Ward 5 sometime after 10pm.
The boy was connected to medical equipment, with two nasal prongs inserted into his nostrils to feed high-flow oxygen, as a “life-preserving measure”.
Some time after 11pm, a doctor went into the room.
The woman was sleeping but when woken she became “angry and aggressive”.
“You were swearing and yelling,” Judge Clark said.
The woman then removed the prongs from her son’s nose, pulled the tape off his cheeks, packed her things up, and continued to aggressively yell and swear, before charging at the doctor, who had to step out of the way, as she left.
The woman went downstairs to leave, as the doctor followed her, concerned that without oxygen, the boy would need to be resuscitated.
With her son in her arms, the woman was “yelling and swearing” and said she needed “to be f****** let out or she would smash the doors down”.
She asked the doctor to take the tube out and the stickers off the baby’s face. The stickers enabled the nasal prongs to stay in place and are usually removed with special wipes.
The mum said, “stop stalling, bitch”, then pulled one of the stickers off, causing her son to cry.
About that time, the police and the woman’s mother arrived and eventually managed to calm the woman down, telling her the boy needed oxygen. He was handed back to medical staff, who put him back on oxygen.
‘She became what could be described as irate’
The woman’s lawyer, Jesse Lang, said that while his client uplifted her son, it was fortunate there had been no injuries because she was unable to leave the hospital.
“She took the appropriate step of taking the child to hospital.
“There were delays and she became what could be described as irate while she was there.
“She instructs that her intention was to go to Anglesea hospital ... whether that was accepted or not by the jury.”
Judge Clark accepted that was her evidence, but a doctor had testified that Anglesea didn’t have high-flow oxygen at the time.
He was keen to give her another chance, but wondered if another supervision sentence would be sufficient to fit the crime.
“I would submit that it is,” Lang replied.
“He was 2 months old at the time, but that being said, it was a very short, one-off incident in the heat of the moment.
Judge Clark noted the woman’s “attitude toward the trial was not great”.
Even she had accepted that she “lashes out when stressed”, and he worried that by giving her another community-based sentence he was “setting her up for a fail”.
She was serving an intensive supervision sentence at the time.
A pre-sentence report writer stated the woman had “potentially reached a turning point”.
‘I have no doubt you were frustrated’
“There was certainly a delay [in your son] being admitted to the paediatric ward ... likely due to a lack of availability of beds,” the judge said.
“I accept you became stressed at the delays. There’s no doubt that you were angry at the doctor ... [but] she was simply doing her job in an effort to help your child.
“Personally I sympathise, having experienced delays myself and know others have too, but you were disengaged, aggressive and belligerent with [the doctor] and it’s probably fortunate you were not charged.”
He said she was fortunate her mother turned up and was able to calm her down.
“Because if you had left with [baby] the consequences could have been disastrous.
“The baby was of course vulnerable and defenceless.”
The woman continued to have supervised daily contact with her son and the pair were described having a “strong bond”.
However, there were some concerns because she admitted she often couldn’t explain herself without over-reacting or swearing, or going straight to anger or sadness.
“I have noticed that myself during the course of the trial.
“I had to reprimand you ... you were eye-rolling, yelling out and making hand gestures. When I was summing up, you were entirely disinterested.
“As the verdict came, you were highly agitated and interrupted proceedings and had to be put in the cells to calm down.”
However, despite not knowing whether she would complete it, he agreed to sentence her to two years' supervision, the maximum available, and 150 hours' community work, which would also be judicially monitored.
“If you don’t adhere to it, we will see each other again.”
Belinda Feek is an Open Justice reporter based in Waikato. She has worked at NZME for 10 years and has been a journalist for 21.
