Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-m9pkr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-12T02:53:02.049Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

2.2 - The extremely premature infant at the crossroads: ethical and legal considerations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 August 2009

Simon N. Whitney
Affiliation:
M.D., J.D. Department of Family and Community Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, 3701 Kirby Drive, Suite 600, Houston, Texas 77098, USA
Lorry R. Frankel
Affiliation:
Stanford University, California
Amnon Goldworth
Affiliation:
Stanford University, California
Mary V. Rorty
Affiliation:
Stanford University, California
William A. Silverman
Affiliation:
Columbia University, New York
Get access

Summary

Introduction

The retrospectoscope is usually a pleasure to use. After someone else's case turns out badly, simply direct the retrospectoscope at the original clinical events and explain calmly how you would have made better decisions, resulting in a better outcome. In the case of Baby Girl M, it is plain that aggressive management from the moment of birth would have avoided the awkward six hours in which she received comfort care only, but that is not the whole story. In fact, it is my thankless duty to assert that aggressive care was inappropriate at any time, and that optimal management would have resulted, not in survival, but in her prompt and intended death. That did not happen, and I am pleased for Baby Girl M herself, who is doing well, but her good outcome does not vindicate her initial management. To understand how she should have been managed, we must begin with the issues raised by infants who are born at the margin of viability.

This essay reviews the determination of viability, moves on to the legal doctrines that influence care decisions, discusses the way these issues illuminate the case of Baby Girl M, and concludes with recommendations for a process designed to lead to better decisions.

Shades of viability

An infant's chance of survival gradually increases with gestational age, so the limit of viability is blurred rather than distinct.

Type
Chapter
Information
Ethical Dilemmas in Pediatrics
Cases and Commentaries
, pp. 37 - 51
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2005

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.)

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
×