Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-5c569c448b-b4ls7 Total loading time: 1.06 Render date: 2022-07-03T19:20:36.881Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true } hasContentIssue true

Chapter 10 - Fetal Analysis

from Section 3 - Professionally Responsible Clinical Practice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 November 2019

Laurence B. McCullough
Affiliation:
Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell
John H. Coverdale
Affiliation:
Baylor College of Medicine, Texas
Frank A. Chervenak
Affiliation:
Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell
Get access

Summary

This chapter provides an ethical framework to guide decision making about fetal analysis.

The ethical principle of respect for autonomy in professional ethics in obstetrics creates the obstetrician’s prima facie ethical obligation to empower the pregnant patient to make informed and voluntary decisions about obstetric management. This ethical obligation has two components. The first is providing her with clinical information about options for fetal analysis using nomenclature that is precise.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2019

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

Chervenak, FA, McCullough, LB, Dudenhausen, J. Fetal analysis with invasive method (FA-I) and fetal analysis with non-invasive method (FA-NI): replacing current, deceptively imprecise clinical nomenclature. J Perinal Med 2017; 45: 985987.Google ScholarPubMed
Chervenak, FA, McCullough, LB. Ethical dimensions of first-trimester aneuploidy screening. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2014; 57: 226231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chervenak, J, McCullough, LB, Chervenak, FA. Surgery without consent or miscommunication? A new look at a landmark case. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2015; 212: 586590.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wielgos, M, Chervenak, FA, McCullough, LB, Dudenhausen, JW. Deliberative clinical ethical judgment: an essential component of contemporary obstetrics. J Perinat Med 2013; 41: 627630.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chervenak, FA, McCullough, LB, Brent, RL. The perils of the imperfect expectation of the perfect baby. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010; 203: 101.e15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Engel, G. A unified concept of health and disease. IRE Trans Med Electron 2009; 10.1109/IRET-ME.1960.5008004. Originally appeared in Perspect Biol Med 1960; 13: 4857.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kon, AA. The shared decision-making continuum. JAMA 2010; 304: 903904.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chervenak, FA, McCullough, LB, Sharma, G, Davis, J. Gross, G. Enhancing patient autonomy with risk assessment and invasive diagnosis: an ethical solution to a clinical challenge. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008; 199: 19.e1–19.e4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Faden, RR, Becker, C, Lewis, C, Freeman, J, et al. Disclosure of information to patients in medical care. Med Care 1981; 19: 718733.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beauchamp, TL, Childress, JF. Principles of Biomedical Ethics, 7th ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2012.Google Scholar
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Committee on Practice Bulletins. Screening for fetal chromosomal abnormalities. Obstet Gynecol 2007; 109: 217227.CrossRef
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Committee on Genetics. The Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine. Publications Committee. Noninvasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy. Obstet Gynecol 2012; 120: 15321534.CrossRef
Norton, ME, Rose, NC, Benn, P. Noninvasive prenatal testing for fetal aneuploidy: clinical assessment and a plea for restraint. Obstet Gynecol 2013; 121; 847850.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicolaides, KH, Chervenak, FA, McCullough, LB, Avgidou, K, Papageorghiou, A. Evidence-based obstetrics ethics and informed decision-making by pregnant woman about invasive diagnosis after first-trimester assessment of risk for trisomy 21. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005; 193: 322326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@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
×