Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T06:50:55.743Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 26 - Ethical Issues

from Part IV - SPECIAL ISSUES

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 May 2010

John Patrick O'Grady ,
Martin L. Gimovsky ,
Lucy A. Bayer-Zwirello  and
Kevin Giordano
By
Joanna M. Cain
John Patrick O'Grady
Affiliation:
Tufts University, Massachusetts
Joanna M. Cain
Affiliation:
Professor and Chair, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Get access

Summary

The moral conflicts that surround abortion, prenatal diagnosis, invasive fetal therapy, and maternal refusal of recommended care all carry an implied concern for the dependent variable in the choices made, the fetus. The social context is important in understanding the maternal-fetal relationship; however, genetic linkages that have traditionally been called on in this context are being challenged by surrogacy and other reproductive technologies. Continued fetal existence depends on an intact maternal circulation. Access to the fetus is possible only by accepting varying levels of maternal risk. Physicians can also be, secondarily, advocates for fetal well-being, but not at the expense of their obligation to the mother. If physicians can maintain this ethical focus, it is likely to encourage use of the medical care system by those wary of implied police activities of healthcare givers.

Keywords

abortionethical rightsfetal therapymaternal-fetal relationshiphealthcare giversmaternal risk
Type
Chapter
Information
Operative Obstetrics , pp. 810 - 819
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Chervanek, F, McCullough, L: Does obstetrics ethics have any role in the obstetrician's response to the abortion controversy?Am J Obstet Gynecol 1990; 163:1425–1429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryan, KJ: Abortion or motherhood, suicide and madness. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1992;Apr;166(4): 1029–1036.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curran C: Contemporary debate in philosophy and religious ethics. In: Reich, W (ed): Encyclopedia of Bioethics. New York: Macmillan, 1978, pp. 17– 26.Google Scholar
Thompson, JJ:A defense of abortion. Philos Public Aff 1971;1:217–234.Google Scholar
Engelhardt, HT Jr:The ontology of abortion. Ethics 1974;84:217–234.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Engelhardt, HT Jr:Viability, abortion, and the difference between a fetus and an infant.Am J Obstet Gynecol 1973 Jun 1;116(3):429–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, LH:Rethinking maternal fetal conflict: Gender and equality in perinatal ethics. Obstet Gynecol 2000 Nov; 96(5 Pt 1):786–791.Google Scholar
Byk, C:The Human Genome Project and the social contract: a law policy approach. J Med Philos 1992 Aug;17(4):371–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jonsen, AR:Ethics of reproductive technology: the deconstruction of a paradigm. Logos (Santa Clara) 1988;9:3–9.Google Scholar
Jonsen, A, Siegler, M, Winslade, W:Clinical Ethics, 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1992.Google Scholar
Meyer, M: Patients' duties. J Med Philos 1992 Oct; 17(5):541–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chervenak, FA, McCullough, LB:Implementation of first-trimester risk assessment for trisomy 21: Ethical considerations. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005 Jun; 192(6):1777–1781.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharma, G, McCullough, LB, Chervenak, FA: Ethical considerations of early (first vs. second trimester) risk assessment disclosure for trisomy 21 and patient choice in screening versus diagnostic testing. Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet 2007 Feb 15; 145(1):99–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dworkin, R: Life's Dominion: An Argument About Abortion, Euthanasia and Individual Freedom. New York: Alfred Knopf, 1993.Google Scholar
Steinbock, B: Life Before Birth: The Moral and Legal Status of Embryos and Fetuses. Boston: Oxford University Press, 1992.Google Scholar
Robertson, JA:Casey and the resuscitation of Roe v. Wade. Hastings Cent Rep 1992 Sep–Oct;22(5):24–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zarutskie, PW, Muller, CH, Magone, M, Soules, MR:The clinical relevance of sex selection techniques. Fertil Steril 1989 Dec;52(6):891–905. Review.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, SR, Elkins, TE:Ethical issues in prenatal diagnosis. Clin Obstet Gynecol 1988 Jun;31(2): 408–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wertz, D, Fletcher, J: Fatal knowledge? Prenatal diagnosis and sex selection. Hastings Cent Rep 1989;19: 21–27.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blank, RH:Regulating Reproduction, 1st ed. New York: Columbia University Press, 1990. pp. 45–91.Google Scholar
Evans, MI, Fletcher, JC, Zador, IE, Newton, BW, Quigg, MH, Struyk, CD:Selective first-trimester termination in octuplet and quadruplet pregnancies: Clinical and ethical issues. Obstet Gynecol 1988 Mar;71(3 Pt 1):289–296.Google Scholar
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists: Multifetal pregnancy reduction in Ethics in Obstetrics and Gynecology, Second Edition. Washington, DC. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Epubwww.acog.org 2007.
Gates, E: Maternal choice, will it work both ways?Women's Health Issues 1990;1:25–27.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chescheir, N, Cefalo, R:Prenatal diagnosis and caring. Women's Health Issues 1992;2:123–132.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nolan, K: First fruits: genetic screening. Hastings Cent Rep 1992;22(suppl):S2–S4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Maternal Decision Making, Ethics, and the Law: Committee Opinion. Washington, DC: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, 321, November 2005.
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists: Using Preimplantation Embryos for Research. Committee Opinion. Washington, DC: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, 347, November 2006.
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists: Code of Professional Ethics. Washington, DC: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. January, 2004.
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists: Ethical Decision Making in Obstetrics and Gynecology Committee Opinion, 390, 2007. Washington, DC: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists: Ethics in Obstetrics and Gynecology, Second Edition., Washington, DC: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. (www.acog.org), Epub, 2007.
Redelmeier, DA, Rozin, P, Kahneman, D:Understanding patients' decisions. Cognitive and emotional perspectives. JAMA 1993 Jul 7;270(1):72–76. Review.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elias, S, Annas, GJ:Perspectives on fetal surgery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1983 Apr 1;45(7):807–812. No abstract available.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruddick, W, Wilcox, W:Operating on the fetus. Hastings Cent Rep 1982 Oct 12;(5):10–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists: Neural Tube Defects, Number 44, July 2003. Washington, DC: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Bioethics: Fetal therapy — ethical considerations. Pediatrics 1999 May;103(5 Pt 1):1061–1063.CrossRef
Chavkin, W:Drug addiction and pregnancy: Policy crossroads. Am J Public Health 1990 Apr;80 (4):483–487. Review.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strong, C: Court-ordered treatment in obstetrics: The ethical views and the legal framework. Obstet Gynecol 1991 Nov;78(5 Pt 1):861–868.
Mahowald, M:Beyond abortion: Refusal of caesarean section. Bioethics 1989 Apr;3(2):106–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chervenak, FA, McCullough, LB. Ethics of maternal-fetal surgery. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med 2007 Dec; 12(6):426–431. Epub 2007 Aug 2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Committee on Ethics, ACOG Committee Opinion Number 369, June 2007. Multifetal pregnancy reduction. Obstet Gynecol 2007 Jun;109(6):1511–1515.CrossRef
Chervenak, FA, McCullough, LB, Levene, MI:An ethically justified, clinically comprehensive approach to peri-viability: Gynaecological, obstetric, perinatal and neonatal dimensions. J Obstet Gynaecol 2007 Jan;27(1):3–7. Review.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vavasseur, C, Foran, A, Murphy, JF: Consensus statements on the borderlands of neonatal viability: From uncertainty to grey areas. Ir Med J 2007 Sep;100 (8):561–564.Google Scholar
Philip, J, Silver, RK, Wilson, RD, Thom, EA, Zachary, JM, Mohide, P, Mahoney, MJ, Simpson, JL, Platt, LD, Pergament, E, Hershey, D, Filkins, K, Johnson, A, Shulman, LP, Bang, J, MacGregor, S, Smith, JR, Shaw, D, Wapner, RJ, Jackson, LG, NICHD EATA Trial Group: Late first-trimester invasive prenatal diagnosis: Results of an international randomized trial. Obstet Gynecol 2004 Jun;103(6):1164–1173.Google Scholar
Kuliev, A, Jackson, L, Froster, U, Brambati, B, Simpson, JL, Verlinsky, Y, Ginsberg, N, Smidt-Jensen, S, Zakut, H:Chorionic villus sampling safety. Report of World Health Organization/EURO meeting in association with the Seventh International Conference on Early Prenatal Diagnosis of Genetic Diseases, Tel-Aviv, Israel, May 21, 1994. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996 Mar;174(3):807–811.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, LG, Zachary, JM, Fowler, SE, Desnick, RJ, Golbus, MS, Ledbetter, DH, Mahoney, MJ, Pergament, E, Simpson, JL, Black, S, et al: A randomized comparison of transcervical and transabdominal chorionic-villus sampling. The U. S. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Chorionic-Villus Sampling and Amniocentesis Study Group. N Engl J Med 1992 Aug 27;327 (9):594–598. PMID: 1640952.Google Scholar
Natarajan G, Klein MD: The fetus as a patient: Prenatal diagnosis and fetal therapy. emedicine, 2006 (www.imedicine.com topic = 2953).

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×