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-5b777bbd6c-2c8nx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-06-18T12:10:10.838Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Part I - Starting at the Beginning

Prenatal and Neonatal Issues

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 May 2025

Edited by
Paul J. Ford  and
Denise M. Dudzinski
Paul J. Ford
Affiliation:
The Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland
Denise M. Dudzinski
Affiliation:
University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle
Get access
Type
Chapter
Information
Complex Ethics Consultations
Cases that Haunt Us
 , pp. 15 - 46
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2025

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.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

References

Orr, RD, Perkin, RM. Clinical ethics consultations with children. J Clin Ethics, 1994; 5(4): 323–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Duff, RS, Campbell, AG. Moral and ethical dilemmas in the special care nursery. New Engl J Med, 1973; 289(17): 890–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nondiscrimination on the basis of handicap; procedures and guidelines relating to health care for handicapped infants – HHS. Final rules. Fed Regist, 1985; 50: 14879–92.Google Scholar
President’s Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Biomedical and Behavioral Research. Deciding to Forgo Life-Sustaining Treatment. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1983.Google Scholar
Wing, KR. The law and the public’s health, 3rd ed. Ann Arbor, MI: Health Administration Press, 1990; 32. (As quoted in Diekema, DS. Parental refusals of medical treatment: the harm principle as threshold for state intervention. Theor Med, 2004; 25(4): 250–1.)Google Scholar
Fox, E, Stocking, C. Ethics consultants’ recommendations for life-prolonging treatment of patients in a persistent vegetative state. JAMA, 1993; 270(21): 2578–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fletcher, JC, Hoffman, DE. Ethics committees: time to experiment with standards. Ann Intern Med, 1994; 120(4): 335–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fox, E, Meyers, S, Pearlman, R. Ethics consultation in U.S. hospitals: a national survey. AJOB, 2007; 7(2): 13–25.Google ScholarPubMed
Lumet, S. 12 Angry Men. United States: MGM Studios; 1957.Google Scholar

References

Taeusch, HW, Ballard, RA, eds. Avery’s Diseases of the Newborn, 8th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier-Saunders, 2005; 1123–32.Google Scholar
President’s Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Biomedical and Behavioral Research. Deciding to Forgo Life-Sustaining Treatment. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1983.Google Scholar
Diekema, DS. Parental refusal of medical treatment: The harm principle and threshold for state intervention. Theor Med, 2004; 25: 243–64.Google ScholarPubMed
Beauchamp, T, Childress, J. Principles of Biomedical Ethics, 5th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001; 124.Google Scholar
Schroeter, K. Ethics in perioperative practice: Patient advocacy. AORN J, 2002; 75(5): 941–4, 949.Google ScholarPubMed
Lantos, J. When parents request seemingly futile treatment for their children. Mt Sinai J Med, 2006; 73(3): 587.Google ScholarPubMed
The Revised Code of Washington 7.70.065.Google Scholar
Groudine, SB. The child Jehovah’s Witness patient: A legal and ethical dilemma. Surgery, 1997; 121: 357–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Capron, AM. At law: Baby Ryan and virtual futility. The Hastings Cent Rep, 1995; 25: 2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Annas, GJ. Asking the courts to set the standard of emergency care: The case of Baby K. New Engl J Med, 2006; 330: 1542–5.Google Scholar

References

The first published account of this story appeared in J Clin Ethics, Fall 2005; 218–22.Google Scholar
Schutz, A. Symbol, reality and society. In: Natanson, M, ed. Alfred Schutz: Collected Papers I. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1971; 287–356.Google Scholar
Frank, A. Experiencing illness through storytelling. In: Toombs, SK, ed. Handbook of Phenomenology and Medicine. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 2001; 241.Google Scholar

References

Bliton, MJ. Ethics: “Life before birth” and moral complexity in maternal–fetal surgery for spina bifida. Clin Perinatol, 2003; 30: 449–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chervenak, FA, McCullough, LB. A comprehensive framework for fetal research and its application to fetal surgery for spina bifida. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2002; 187(1): 10–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lyerly, AD, Mahowald, MB. Maternal–fetal surgery for treatment of myelomeningocele. Clin Perinatol, 2003; 30: 155–65.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bruner, JP, Tulipan, N. Intrauterine repair of spina bifida. Clin Obstet Gynecol, 2005; 48(4): 942–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Management of Myelomeningocele Study (MOMS): A Randomized Trial of Prenatal Versus Postnatal Repair of Myelomeningocele. Rockville, MD: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Fetal Surgery Units Group, 2003.Google Scholar
Bliton, MJ, Zaner, RM. Over the cutting edge: How ethics consultation illuminates the moral complexity of open-uterine fetal repair of spina bifida and patients’ decision making. J Clin Ethics, 2001; 12(4): 346–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Churchill, LR, Bliton, M, eds. Parental voices in maternal–fetal surgery. Clin Obstet Gynecol, 2005; 48(3): 509–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doherty, D, Shurtleff, DB. Pediatric perspective on prenatal counseling for myelomeningocele. Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol, 2006; 76: 645–53.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nietzsche, F. Philosophy in the Tragic Age of the Greeks. Translated by Cowan, M.. Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing, 1962 (reprinted 1996); 48.Google Scholar
Zaner, RM. The Context of Self: A Phenomenological Inquiry Using Medicine as a Clue. Athens, OH: Ohio University Press, 1981; 52–5.Google Scholar
Natanson, M. The Erotic Bird: Phenomenology in Literature. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1998; 54, 133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bliton, MJ, Finder, SG. Traversing boundaries: Clinical ethics and moral experience in the withdrawal of life supports. Theor Med Bioeth, 2002; 23(3): 233–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harris, LH. Rethinking maternal–fetal conflict: Gender and equality in perinatal ethics. Obstet Gynecol, 2000; 96(5): 786–91.Google ScholarPubMed

References

Ford, PJ, Dudzinski, DM. Live and learn: Courage, honest and vulnerability. In: Ford, PJ, Dudzinski, DM, eds. Complex Ethics Consultations: Cases that Haunt Us. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008; 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weise, KL, Okun, AL, Carter, BS, et al. Guidance on forgoing life-sustaining medical treatment. Pediatrics, 2017; 140(3): e20171905. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2017-1905CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wocial, LD. Life support decisions involving imperiled infants. J Perinat Neonatal Nurs, 2000; 14(2): 73–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reingold, RB, Gostin, LO, Goodwin, MB. Legal risks and ethical dilemmas for clinicians in the aftermath of Dobbs. JAMA, 2022; 328(17): 1695–6. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2022.18453CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bosslet, GT, Pope, TM, Rubenfeld, GD, et al. An official ATS/AACN/ACCP/ESICM/SCCM policy statement: Responding to requests for potentially inappropriate treatments in intensive care units. Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 2015; 191(11): 1318–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fox, E, Danis, M, Tarzian, AJ, Duke, CC. Ethics consultation in US hospitals: A national follow-up study. Am J Bioeth, 2022; 22(4): 5–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2021.1893547CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Murthy, VH. Confronting health worker burnout and well-being. N Engl J Med, 2022 Aug 18; 387(7): 577–9. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp2207252CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

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
×