JACKSONVILLE, Fla. – A judge, a hospital bed, and a woman in active labor fighting over who gets to make a medical decision about her body.
That is what happened to Jacksonville mother Cherise Doyley, who says she learned while in labor that doctors had gone to court seeking an emergency C-section.
The three-hour Zoom hearing took place while Doyley was in labor at UF Health Jacksonville.
Doyley said she had made her wishes clear throughout her pregnancy that she wanted to attempt to have a vaginal birth after three previous C-sections.
“Since the very beginning of my pregnancy, I made it very clear that I did not want to have a C-section unless there was an actual emergency,” Doyley said.
The case raises a larger question: How can a court intervene in a pregnant woman’s medical decisions in Florida?
Florida law and a patient’s right to refuse treatment
Attorney Robert Ellis said the starting point under Florida law is that competent patients generally have the right to make their own medical decisions, including refusing treatment.
The Florida Constitution protects these rights.
“As a general rule, a patient who goes to the hospital has the right to make decisions, medical decisions,” Ellis said.
But Ellis said pregnancy can change the legal analysis.
“Even if a doctor thinks that certain treatment is necessary and the proper form of treatment and could save your life, you have the right to say no,” Ellis said. “But that changes in Florida when there is a fetus.”
Viability is a key legal threshold
Florida courts have previously considered whether the state can intervene when a pregnant woman refuses medical treatment.
In 2009, Samantha Burton was 25 weeks pregnant when a judge ordered her to remain in the hospital and undergo treatment, including a C-section, after she went into premature labor.
The baby did not survive.
Burton appealed, and a Florida appeals court later overturned the emergency order, saying the lower court should have established that the fetus was viable before ordering unwanted treatment.
The appeals court did not say courts can never override a pregnant woman’s medical decisions.
Instead, the decision laid out a framework for weighing the state’s interest in protecting a viable fetus against a woman’s constitutional rights.
Ellis said the decision in Burton is important to understanding what happened in Doyley’s case.
“The court in Burton says once there’s a fetus and once there is viability, that triggers the state’s interest in protecting that fetus, and that’s when the whole ball game changes,” Ellis said.
In other words, viability is a key threshold.
Once a fetus is considered capable of surviving outside the womb, Florida courts have recognized a state interest in protecting it from serious harm.
That does not automatically mean the state has more rights than the pregnant woman. Ellis said courts must weigh the competing interests and determine whether the state’s interest is compelling enough to override the woman’s fundamental right to bodily autonomy.
Doyley questions the process
During the court hearing, Doyley repeatedly asserted her right to make her own medical decisions. She has a background as a professional birthing doula and understood that it was her choice to attempt a vaginal birth after C-section.
“I still have rights,” she said.
Ellis said the circumstances surrounding the hearing raise questions beyond the medical decision itself, particularly about due process.
“We have a woman in active labor from her hospital bed with an iPad shoved in her face,” Ellis said.
He said Doyley did not have an opportunity to consult with an attorney, challenge the evidence presented to the court or propose alternatives that could have addressed concerns about the fetus.
“She didn’t have the chance to consult with an attorney to know her rights, to challenge the evidence, to suggest less intrusive means that may have protected the fetus and allowed the state to protect the fetus as well,” Ellis said.
Ellis said that aspect of the case is particularly concerning because the proceeding involved an invasive medical procedure.
Doyley ultimately delivered her daughter by C-section after the baby’s heart rate dropped.
The judge had allowed her to continue laboring unless an emergency arose. A key point for Doyley is that at the time of the emergency hearing, she says her labor was progressing and that there were no signs of fetal distress.
Ellis said Doyley’s case could prompt Florida courts to examine what protections patients should have when hospitals seek emergency court intervention.
He believes the case could potentially set a new precedent.
“I think it can,” Ellis said. “I think that there’s elements of this case that are concerning to patients, to women, to anyone using our healthcare system.”
Doyley’s attorneys have filed a Notice of Intent to Initiate Litigation against UF Health Jacksonville. She is currently in the mandatory pre-suit process required before a medical malpractice lawsuit can be filed.
UF Health Jacksonville has declined to comment, citing patient privacy.
Copyright 2026 by WJXT News4JAX – All rights reserved.