Porter County
Mother suffered life-threatening complications
Porter Superior Court Judge Mary Harper granted a 10-day emergency temporary restraining order against Julie Lentz, of Chesterton, on Friday, and has scheduled a hearing on the matter for 2:30 p.m. Monday in her courtroom.
Lentz, doing business as Sacred Lotus Midwifery Services, did not return a request for comment and did not have an attorney listed in online court records. She was not listed as being licensed with the state, according to online licensing records.
“At best, Lentz was unable to identify the life-threatening circumstances unfolding in front of her. At worst, her care as a midwife caused or contributed to the resulting injury and death,” according to court documents.
Lentz is aware of Indiana’s licensing requirements for midwives, but asserts to clients that she is exempt from these requirements, according to court documents. “Lentz’s disregard for Indiana law in practicing without a license has caused irreparable harm to the families she works with as a midwife and continues to pose a danger to Indiana families,” according to documents.
In February, according to the request for an emergency temporary restraining order, Lentz contracted with a Valparaiso family to act as the midwife at the expectant mother’s home birth. At the time, the mother stopped seeing other doctors, leaving Lentz as her only health care provider during the final months of her pregnancy.
Complications began to arise April 22, six days before the baby’s due date, according to court documents, when the mother experienced a leak of amniotic fluid, as identified by Lentz, documents said. After experiencing the leak on and off for five days, the mother began having contractions that subsided after a few hours, according to court documents.
Over the ensuing days, according to documents, the mother’s situation grew more dire, and Lentz performed several exams to track how far she was dilating, at one point saying the baby was breech. The mother’s water broke in full on April 29, and Lentz assured the mother the next day that the baby was moving and the mother did not have an elevated temperature, according to documents.
On May 1, the mother began again experiencing contractions with increasing intensity. To try to ease the pain from the contractions, the mother sat for some time in a birthing tub set up by Lentz, according to documents. “While in the tub, the mother began experiencing a burning sensation inside her stomach, and her temperature rose to 99.0 degrees,” according to documents.
That night, Lentz performed another exam and said the baby’s head was down, according to documents.
“After the exam, the mother told her husband that she wanted to go to the hospital and get an epidural. When Lentz overheard the conversation, she talked the mother out of going to the hospital by saying the hospital would first have to do various tests so that the baby would likely come before the mother received the epidural,” according to documents.
The mother’s temperature continued to increase and Lentz replied that “it was nothing to worry about,” according to documents.
The mother later said she felt cold while in the birthing tub and when she told Lentz multiple times that her head hurt, the documents state, “Lentz told her that it was normal, since she was dehydrated and in labor.”
Lentz later told the mother her cervix was swollen, preventing the baby from being born, and suggested she take some homeopathic remedies provided by Lentz to reduce the swelling. She also said at one point that the baby was again breech, according to documents.
When the mother again said she wanted to go to the hospital, Lentz suggested three different positions to reduce the swelling, according to court documents. Shortly after another exam, the mother decided to go to the hospital.
“After calling for an ambulance, Lentz told the mother to tell hospital staff her water broke within the previous 24 hours, even though it had partially broken 10 days prior and completely broke three days prior,” according to documents. “When paramedics arrived, (Lentz) told them the mother was dilated 5-6 centimeters, that she could feel the baby’s head, and that the mother’s vitals and the baby’s vitals were stable throughout labor,” according to court documents.
An ultrasound at the hospital revealed that the baby had died and the mother underwent a cesarean section to remove the baby. “Following the surgery, the doctor told the mother that she was lucky to be alive and that she had one of the worst infections the doctor had seen in her 10 years of practice,” and that the amniotic sac was completely drained of fluid, according to documents.
Under state law, according to the five-count complaint filed against Lentz, after July 1, 2018, an individual could not practice as a midwife unless licensed to practice as a certified nurse midwife, or certified as a direct entry midwife.
“Although she represents herself as a midwife and performs midwifery services, Lentz holds neither a certified nurse midwife license nor a certified direct entry midwife certificate in Indiana,” according to documents, which showed her experience and background don’t meet the required criteria.
According to the documents, Lentz claims she is exempt from governmental licensing requirements because she operates in a “private membership association” called Dar a Luz and requires each person who wants to use her as a midwife to join her association. “Lutz claims that within the PMA, the midwife-client relationship is a private transaction that is outside the scope of public laws.”
Lentz acknowledges in a contract with clients that she is not licensed by the state, according to court documents.
In an email last year to a case analyst in the Indiana Attorney General’s Medical Licensing section, Lentz stated that the state does not have jurisdiction over people acting in their private character and capacity, in the privacy of their own homes, according to documents.
“Please be advised that I am exercising constitutionally secured rights and not mere privileges and immunities offer (sic) to corporations and other entities. Corporate law does not apply to me in my private character and capacity,” she wrote.
PREVIOUS ARTICLE
