Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Part 1 THE EXTREMELY PRETERM INFANT: EPIDEMIOLOGY, PERCEPTIONS, AND PRACTICES
- Part 2 BIOETHICS
- Part 3 REPORTS, OFFICIAL OPINIONS, AND GUIDELINES
- Part 4 THE LAW
- 30 Introduction
- 31 U.S. Law
- 32 The United Kingdom
- 33 Canada
- 34 Australia
- 35 Japan
- 36 Italy, Germany, and Poland
- 37 France
- 38 The Netherlands
- Part 5 EPILOGUE: TRUTH, TRUST, AND BOUNDARIES
- References
- Index
31 - U.S. Law
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 September 2009
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Part 1 THE EXTREMELY PRETERM INFANT: EPIDEMIOLOGY, PERCEPTIONS, AND PRACTICES
- Part 2 BIOETHICS
- Part 3 REPORTS, OFFICIAL OPINIONS, AND GUIDELINES
- Part 4 THE LAW
- 30 Introduction
- 31 U.S. Law
- 32 The United Kingdom
- 33 Canada
- 34 Australia
- 35 Japan
- 36 Italy, Germany, and Poland
- 37 France
- 38 The Netherlands
- Part 5 EPILOGUE: TRUTH, TRUST, AND BOUNDARIES
- References
- Index
Summary
During the 1970s, it was a matter of public record that large numbers of infants died each year in U.S. hospitals as a result of the withdrawal or withholding of treatment,(255) and surveys demonstrated that a large percentage of physicians were willing to forego life-sustaining treatment for disabled infants.(256) In one study it was revealed that 85% of pediatric surgeons and 65% of pediatricians surveyed were willing to honor parental wishes not to perform necessary surgery on an infant with Down syndrome, but less than 6% would deny similar treatment for a child without the disability.(256) Furthermore, some physicians made decisions not to treat without parental consultation,(257) although on the basis of the law at the time it was generally considered unlawful.(258) In 1975, John Robertson, professor of law, wrote:
In the case of a defective infant the withholding of essential care would appear to present a possible cause of homicide by omission on the part of parents, physicians, and nurses, with the degree of homicide depending on the extent of premeditation. Following a live birth the law generally presumes that personhood exists and that there is entitlement to the usual protections, whatever the specific physical or mental characteristics of the infant may be. Every state imposes on parents a legal duty to provide necessary medical assistance to a helpless minor child. If they withhold such care, and the child dies, they may be prosecuted for manslaughter or murder … likewise physicians and nurses may face criminal liability … even when all parties, including the parents, are in agreement. […]
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Extreme PrematurityPractices, Bioethics and the Law, pp. 138 - 159Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2006