Quote Originally Posted by snegron
I wonder why the act of videotaping or photography would concern hospitals? After all, if they follow procedures correctly they should have nothing to hide in front of a jury. I don't think they could claim any proprietary defense because they have no copyright ownership over the delivery procedure. I still think their main reason for not allowing any visual recording is because it is too easy for them to have a bully lawyer persuade a jury with legal and medical terminology. After all, a picture is worth more than a thousand words and if a jury could see the truth of what happened there would be no slick talk that would help cover up any wrongdoing. I don't think that it is to protect the privacy of the patient because if a patient consents there should be no problem. Also, all the patient's allegedly private information is given to nomedical personnell like debt collectors if he or she fails to pay the bill on time.

Photography and videotaping would keep public servants honest. Think of the police. They have video cameras in their patrol cars and videotape every traffic stop. Not to mention they photograph victims and their injuries to have an accurate depiction in court. The ethical question is that if someone has nothing to hide, why fear the camera?
I generally agree that you SHOULD be allowed to tape the birth of your child - but it is certainly w/in the rights of the hospital to prohibit it. Normally I'm of the school that believes "that it is better to beg for forgiveness than to ask for permission."

But perhaps in this instance seeking permission from the doctor beforehand might have worked to overrule an overbearing attending nurse.

BTW: did you get a model release from the baby?