A pregnant woman at 38 weeks was denied accompaniment by her partner during a visit to the obstetrics and gynecology emergency department at Hospital Sousa Martins (HSM) of the Unidade Local de Saúde (ULS) da Guarda. The incident involved the father of the child and the woman’s husband.
The event took place in November 2023, though the formal opinion from the Entidade Reguladora da Saúde (ERS) was released only on April 24 of the current year.
At the time, the woman, 38 weeks and two days into her pregnancy, went to the hospital’s emergency department “to conduct maternal-fetal wellbeing monitoring,” according to a report from ERS presented on its official website.
“On that occasion, despite repeated requests from the patient and her husband, the HSM did not allow the patient to be accompanied by her partner.”
Responding to the ERS, the hospital claimed that the child’s father could not enter “due to the limited space of the facility.” The area was reportedly occupied with “equipment necessary for the space,” as well as “doctors, nurses, and student trainees, as it is a university hospital,” according to the hospital’s statement.
According to the initial complaint lodged with the entity, two doctors and three trainees were present at the time.
“Article 17, Section 2 of Law no. 15/2014, of March 21, provides for the possibility that the accompaniment of a pregnant patient may not be granted in facilities where the space does not accommodate the presence of a companion,” begins the ERS’s deliberation. It goes on to state that “the regulation must be adhered to based on principles of balance, proportionality, and reasonableness”—a standard believed not met in this instance.
The ERS notes, “In a university hospital setting, the presence of trainees may be justified in care delivery scenarios like the one under review, but it must always […] comply with the rights of pregnant patients (including their right to be accompanied in consultation or during emergency episodes).”
“This did not occur in the present situation, where Dr. CS and three trainees’ presence took precedence over fulfilling the patient’s right to be accompanied in that consultation,” the ERS concluded in its decision.
Moreover, the entity emphasized that the violation of the pregnant woman’s right to accompaniment “even impacted the consultation itself and the care provided, as without her husband’s presence, the patient chose not to undergo ‘touch exams and […] strep b’ tests, which were supposed to be conducted during that ‘maternal-fetal wellbeing supervision’ of her pregnancy.”
Given these considerations, the ERS issued guidance to the Unidade Local de Saúde da Guarda to ensure pregnant women’s right to accompaniment “during consultations, exams, childbirth, and postpartum,” as well as to implement measures to secure this right and inform hospital staff about the necessity to protect this right.
