Book contents
- Professional Ethics in Obstetrics and Gynecology
- Professional Ethics in Obstetrics and Gynecology
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- Section 1 Professional Ethics in Obstetrics and Gynecology
- Chapter 1 Professional Ethics in Medicine
- Chapter 2 Professional Ethics in Obstetrics and Gynecology
- Chapter 3 Decision Making By, With, and For Patients
- Chapter 4 Confidentiality
- Chapter 5 Conflicts of Interest and Conflicts of Commitment
- Section 2 Pedagogy of Professional Ethics in Obstetrics and Gynecology
- Section 3 Professionally Responsible Clinical Practice
- Section 4 Professionally Responsible Leadership
- Section 5 Professionally Responsible Innovation and Research
- Section 6 Professionally Responsible Health Policy and Advocacy
- Glossary of Key Concepts
- Index
- References
Chapter 2 - Professional Ethics in Obstetrics and Gynecology
from Section 1 - Professional Ethics in Obstetrics and Gynecology
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 November 2019
Book contents
- Professional Ethics in Obstetrics and Gynecology
- Professional Ethics in Obstetrics and Gynecology
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- Section 1 Professional Ethics in Obstetrics and Gynecology
- Chapter 1 Professional Ethics in Medicine
- Chapter 2 Professional Ethics in Obstetrics and Gynecology
- Chapter 3 Decision Making By, With, and For Patients
- Chapter 4 Confidentiality
- Chapter 5 Conflicts of Interest and Conflicts of Commitment
- Section 2 Pedagogy of Professional Ethics in Obstetrics and Gynecology
- Section 3 Professionally Responsible Clinical Practice
- Section 4 Professionally Responsible Leadership
- Section 5 Professionally Responsible Innovation and Research
- Section 6 Professionally Responsible Health Policy and Advocacy
- Glossary of Key Concepts
- Index
- References
Summary
This chapter provides an introduction to professional ethics in obstetrics and gynecology based on the ethical concept of medicine as a profession and the ethical concepts of the female patient, pregnant patient, and fetal patient. There is also an introduction to professional ethics in perinatal medicine.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Professional Ethics in Obstetrics and Gynecology , pp. 24 - 44Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2019
References
Gregory, J. Lectures on the duties and qualifications of a physician. London: W. Strahan and T. Cadell, 1772. Reprinted in McCullough LB, ed. John Gregory’s Writings on Medical Ethics and the Philosophy of Medicine. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic, 1998: 161–248.Google Scholar
McCullough, LB. John Gregory and the Invention of Professional Medical Ethics and the Profession of Medicine. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faden, RR, Beauchamp, TL. A History and Theory of Informed Consent. New York: Oxford University Press, 1986.Google Scholar
Beauchamp, TL, Childress, JF. Principles of Biomedical Ethics, 7th ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2013.Google Scholar
Williams, JW, Hellman, LM, Pritchard, JA. Williams Obstetrics, 14th ed. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1971.Google Scholar
Harrison, MR, Golbus, MS, Filly, RA. Management of the fetus with a correctable congenital defect. JAMA 1981; 246: 774–777.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harrison, MR, Adzick, NS. The fetus as a patient: surgical considerations. Ann Surg 1991; 213: 279–291.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harrison, MR, Golbus, MS, Filly, RA, eds. The Unborn Patient: Prenatal Diagnosis and Treatment. Philadelphia: Saunders, 1984.Google Scholar
Cunningham, FG, Leveno, KJ, Bloom, SL, et al. J Preface. In Cunningham, FG, Leveno, KJ, Bloom, SL, et al., eds. Williams Obstetrics, 25th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Education, 2018. Available at https://accessmedicine.mhmedical.com/content.aspx?bookid=1918§ionid=185041505 (accessed March 1, 2019; may be behind paywall).Google Scholar
Cunningham, FG, Leveno, KJ, Bloom, SL, et al., eds. Williams Obstetrics, 25th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Education, 2018.Google Scholar
International Academy of Perinatal Medicine. Available at https://iaperinatalmedicine.org/ (accessed March 1, 2019).Google Scholar
Bianchi, D, Crombelhome, TM, D’Alton, ME. Fetology: Diagnosis and Management of the Fetal Patient. New York: McGraw-Hill Professional, 2000.Google Scholar
Bianchi, D, Crombelhome, TM, D’Alton, ME, Malone, F. Fetology: Diagnosis and Management of the Fetal Patient, 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Professional, 2010.Google Scholar
Harrison, M. The Unborn Patient: The Art and Science of Fetal Therapy, 3rd ed. New York: Saunders, 2001.Google Scholar
Adzick, NS. Prospects for fetal surgery. Early Hum Dev 2013; 89: 881–886.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miller, NM, Smith, RP, Fisk, NM. The fetal patient. In Myers, LB, Bulich, L, eds. Anesthesia for Fetal Intervention and Surgery. Hamilton, Ontario, Canada: D.C. Decker, 2010: 1–16.Google Scholar
Cannio, M, Jani, J. Fetal magnetic resonance imaging. In Cody, AM, Brower, S, eds. Twining’s Textbook of Fetal Malformations, 3rd ed. London: Churchill Livingstone, 2015: 561–582.Google Scholar
Grady, D. To mend a birth defect, surgeons operate on the patient within a patient. New York Times, October 23, 2017. Available at www.nytimes.com/2017/10/23/health/fetal-surgery-spina-bifida.html (accessed March 1, 2019).Google Scholar
Chervenak, FA, McCullough, LB. Perinatal ethics: a practical method of analysis of obligations to mother and fetus. Obstet Gynecol 1985; 66: 442–446.Google Scholar
Porter, R, Teich, M, eds. The Enlightenment in National Context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981.Google Scholar
Kant, I. Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. Gregor M, Timmerman J, trans. and ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.Google Scholar
Chervenak, FA, McCullough, LB. Ethical issues in periviable birth. Semin Perinatol 2013; 37: 422–425.Google Scholar
Skupski, DW, Chervenak, FA, McCullough, LB, Bancalari, E, et al. Ethical dimensions of periviability. J Pertinat Med 2010; 38: 579–583.Google Scholar
Chervenak, FA, McCullough, LB, Levine, MI. An ethically justified, clinically comprehensive approach to periviability: gynaecologic, obstetric, perinatal, and neonatal dimensions. J Obstet Gyneacol 2007; 27: 3–7.Google Scholar
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine. Obstetric Care consensus no. 6: Periviability. Obstet Gynecol 2017; 130: e187–e199.Google Scholar
Tyson, JE, Parikh, NA, Langer, J, et al. Intensive care for extreme prematurity – moving beyond gestational age. N Engl J Med 2008; 358: 1672–1681.Google Scholar
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. NICHD Neonatal Research Network (NRN): Extremely preterm birth outcome data. Available at www1.nichd.nih.gov/epbo-calculator/Pages/epbo_case.aspx (accessed March 1, 2019).Google Scholar
Skupski, DW, McCullough, LB, Levene, M, Chervenak, FA. Improving obstetric estimation of outcomes of extremely premature neonates: an evolving challenge. J Perinat Med 2010; 38: 19–22.Google Scholar
Warren, MA. Moral Status: Obligations to Persons and other Living Things. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997.Google Scholar
Strong, C. Moral status and the fetus: continuation of a dialogue. Am J Bioeth 2011; 11: 52–54.Google Scholar
Lyerly, AD, Mahowald, MB. Maternal-fetal surgery for the treatment of myelomeningocele. Clin Perinatol 2003; 30: 155–165.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chervenak, FA, McCullough, LB, Brent, RL. The professional responsibility model of obstetric ethics: avoiding the perils of clashing rights. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2011; 205: 315.e1–5.Google Scholar
Minkoff, H, Marshal, MF, Liashenko, J. The fetus and the “potential child,” and the ethical obligations of obstetricians. Obstet Gynecol 2014; 123: 1100–1103.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Annas, GJ. Protecting the liberty of pregnant patients. N Engl J Med 1987; 316: 1213–1214.Google Scholar
Högberg, U, Lynöe, N, Wulff, M. Cesarean by choice? Empirical study of public values. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2008; 87: 1301–1308.Google Scholar
Chervenak, FA, McCullough, LB. Justified limits on refusing intervention. Hastings Cent Rep 1991; 21: 12–18.Google Scholar
Lyerly, AD, Little, MO, Faden, RR. A critique of the “fetus as a patient.’ Am J Bioeth 2006; 8: W42–W6.Google Scholar
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Committee on Ethics. Committee Opinion 664. Refusal of medically recommended treatment during pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 2016; 127: e175–e1182.Google Scholar
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Committee Opinion No. 390. Ethical decision making in obstetrics and gynecology. Obstet Gynecol 2007; 110: 1479–1487.Google Scholar
American Academy of Pediatrics. Committee on Bioethics. Informed consent, parental permission, and assent in pediatric practice. Pediatrics 1995; 95: 314–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katz, AL, Webb, SA. Committee on Bioethics. American Academy of Pediatrics. Informed consent in decision-making in pediatric practice. Pediatrics 2016; 138: pii: e20161485. doi:10.1542/peds.2016-1485.Google Scholar
Lantos, JD. Ethical problems in decision making in the neonatal ICU. New Engl J Med 2018; 379: 1851–1860.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lantos, JD, Lauderdale, DS. Preterm Babies, Fetal Patients, and Childbearing Choices. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2015.Google Scholar