Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://hdl.handle.net/2440/73433
Citations | ||
Scopus | Web of Science® | Altmetric |
---|---|---|
?
|
?
|
Type: | Journal article |
Title: | Fatal fetal paternalism |
Author: | Wilkinson, D. |
Citation: | Journal of Medical Ethics, 2012; 38(7):396-397 |
Publisher: | British Med Journal Publ Group |
Issue Date: | 2012 |
ISSN: | 0306-6800 1473-4257 |
Statement of Responsibility: | Dominic Wilkinson |
Abstract: | Heuser and colleagues’ survey of obstetricians provides a valuable insight into the current management of severe fetal anomalies in the United States. Their survey reveals two striking features – that counselling for these anomalies is far from neutral, and that there is significant variability between clinicians in their approach to management. In this commentary I outline the reasons to be concerned about both of these. Directiveness in counselling arguably represents a form of paternalism, and the evident variability in practice is likely the result of physician personal values. However, Heuser’s survey may, by shining a light on practice, provide an important step towards a more consistent approach. |
Keywords: | Humans Fetal Diseases Prenatal Diagnosis Abortion, Induced Pregnancy Physicians Female Congenital Abnormalities |
Rights: | Copyright © 2012 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd & Institute of Medical Ethics. All rights reserved. |
DOI: | 10.1136/medethics-2012-100542 |
Published version: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2012-100542 |
Appears in Collections: | Aurora harvest 5 Obstetrics and Gynaecology publications |
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.