Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-dfsvx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T16:13:48.908Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

11 - Fetal intervention and fetal care centers

from Section 2 - Ethical issues at the beginning of life: perinatology and neonatology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 October 2011

Douglas S. Diekema
Affiliation:
Seattle Children's Research Institute
Mark R. Mercurio
Affiliation:
Yale University School of Medicine
Mary B. Adam
Affiliation:
Department of Pediatrics, University of Arizona School of Medicine, Tucson
Get access

Summary

Introduction

Historically, promoting fetal well-being was not a separate endeavor from promoting maternal well-being. New imaging and sampling techniques now enhance our ability to help a woman help her fetus, and, when necessary, directly intervene with the fetus in the womb (Harrison, 2001). Some interventions are offered and recommended as preventive measures in obstetrical offices (i.e., prenatal folic acid), others are routinely provided in labor and delivery suites (i.e., antenatal antibiotics), still others are routine in perinatal specialty care (i.e., antiviral therapy). But with the development of fetal care centers, more invasive medical or surgical procedures, such as antiarrhythmics, an EXIT (ex-utero intrapartum therapy) procedure, or a skilled minimally invasive or open fetal surgery, have become possible. The difference between these newer more invasive procedures and the others seems to lie in the benefit/burden ratios to the fetus and pregnant woman. Three cases will be used to explore the ethical issues that arise from the fetal interventions performed in fetal care centers.

Case narrative 1: standard of care, potentially life-saving, chronic pediatric condition

Pam Smith is a 29-year-old, married, gravida 3 para 2 woman who otherwise has normal prenatal lab values, and has early, routine prenatal care. She has had two normal healthy pregnancies that resulted in two healthy girls, now aged 5 and 3 years. Pam and her husband are really hoping for a son with this pregnancy. At her first 18–20 week ultrasound, however, oligohydramnios was discovered, and she and her husband Bill were given the bad news that their male fetus might have a problem. They were referred to a perinatologist, who agreed with the initial ultrasound, and also found an enlarged bladder and hydronephrosis, both classic findings in a male fetus of a bladder outlet obstruction caused by posterior urethral valves. The couple are counseled about the possibility of referral to a local fetal care center for a vesico-amniotic shunt, which entails placing a catheter with one end in the bladder and the other in the amniotic cavity. This decompresses the bladder, bypassing the valves, and allows amniotic fluid to re-accumulate. The fetal care center staff counsel the Smiths that the vesico-amniotic shunting has been shown to prevent lung hypoplasia, but has not been proven to prevent renal disease. These children may require long-term peritoneal dialysis followed by renal transplant. Not performing the procedure will likely lead to newborn death from pulmonary hypoplasia.

Type
Chapter
Information
Clinical Ethics in Pediatrics
A Case-Based Textbook
, pp. 57 - 62
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2011

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

Adzick, S.N.Thom, E.A.Spong, C.Y.for the MOMS Investigators 2011 A randomized trial of prenatal versus postnatal repair of myelomeningoceleNew England Journal of Medicine 364 993Google Scholar
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists 2006 Innovative practice: ethical guidelines. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 352Obstetrics and Gynecology 108 1589Google Scholar
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists 2007 Research involving women. ACOG Committee Opinion No 377Obstetrics and Gynecology 110 731Google Scholar
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists 2009 Informed consent. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 439Obstetrics and Gynecology 114 401Google Scholar
Appelbaum, P.S.Roth, L.H.Lidz, C.W.Benson, P.Winslade, W. 1987 False hopes and best data: consent to research and the therapeutic misconceptionHastings Center Report 17 20Google Scholar
Brown, S.D.Truog, R.D.Johnson, J.A.Ecker, J.L. 2006 Do differences in the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists positions on the ethics of maternal-fetal interventions reflect subtly divergent professional sensitivities to pregnant women and fetuses?Pediatrics 117 1382Google Scholar
Chervenak, F.A.McCullough, L.B. 2001 The Unborn Patient; The Art and Science of Fetal TherapyHarrison, M.R.Evans, M.I.Adzick, N.S.Holzgreve, W.PhiladelphiaW.B. Saunders Company
Harrison, M.R. 2001 The Unborn Patient; The Art and Science of Fetal TherapyHarrison, M.R.Evans, M.I.Adzick, N.S.Holzgreve, W.PhiladelphiaW.B. Saunders Company
Leuthner, S.R. 2004 Fetal palliative careClinics in Perinatology; Current Controversies in Perinatal Medicine IV 31 649Google Scholar
Lyerly, A.D.Gates, E.A.Cefalo, R.C.Sugarman, J. 2001 Toward the ethical evaluation and use of maternal-fetal surgeryObstetrics and Gynecology 98 689Google Scholar
Lyerly, A.D.Mitchell, L.M.Armstrong, E.M. 2009 Risk and the pregnant bodyHastings Center Report 39 34Google Scholar
Munson, D.Leuthner, S.R. 2007 Palliative care for the family carrying a fetus with a life-limiting diagnosisPediatric Clinics of North America 54 787Google Scholar
Sugarman, J.Kass, N.E.Goodman, S.N. 1998 What patients say about medical researchIRB 20 1Google Scholar
Sullivan, W.J.Douglas, M.J. 2006 Maternal autonomy: ethics and the lawInternational Journal of Obstetric Anesthesia 15 95Google Scholar
Warren, M.A. 1992 Feminist Perspectives in Medical EthicsBequaert Holmes, H.Purdy, L.Bloomington, INIndiana University Press

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
×