The Third Person in the Room

IF 2.3 3区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
Mara Buchbinder
{"title":"The Third Person in the Room","authors":"Mara Buchbinder","doi":"10.1002/hast.4972","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><i>Since the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in</i> Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, <i>the popular media has been flooded with stories about pregnant patients experiencing obstetric complications who were denied access to necessary abortion care and suffered tragic consequences. Yet some of the lesser-told relevant stories include far subtler impacts on the patient-physician relationship. In this commentary, I reflect on interviews that my team and I conducted with general obstetrician-gynecologists in states with near-total bans on abortion. They shared their sense that abortion bans had resulted in an imaginary “third person” in the room, haunting the clinical encounter and intervening in care. I suggest that post</i>-Dobbs <i>abortion bans drive a wedge into the physician-patient relationship that is figuratively embodied by invoking the “third person” in the room</i>.</p>","PeriodicalId":55073,"journal":{"name":"Hastings Center Report","volume":"55 2","pages":"2"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hastings Center Report","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hast.4972","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Since the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, the popular media has been flooded with stories about pregnant patients experiencing obstetric complications who were denied access to necessary abortion care and suffered tragic consequences. Yet some of the lesser-told relevant stories include far subtler impacts on the patient-physician relationship. In this commentary, I reflect on interviews that my team and I conducted with general obstetrician-gynecologists in states with near-total bans on abortion. They shared their sense that abortion bans had resulted in an imaginary “third person” in the room, haunting the clinical encounter and intervening in care. I suggest that post-Dobbs abortion bans drive a wedge into the physician-patient relationship that is figuratively embodied by invoking the “third person” in the room.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Hastings Center Report
Hastings Center Report 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
3.00%
发文量
99
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Hastings Center Report explores ethical, legal, and social issues in medicine, health care, public health, and the life sciences. Six issues per year offer articles, essays, case studies of bioethical problems, columns on law and policy, caregivers’ stories, peer-reviewed scholarly articles, and book reviews. Authors come from an assortment of professions and academic disciplines and express a range of perspectives and political opinions. The Report’s readership includes physicians, nurses, scholars, administrators, social workers, health lawyers, and others.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信