未生育患者的永久绝育:立法焦虑是手术的指征吗?

Q3 Medicine
Catherine Hennessey, Camille Johnson, Hillary McLaren, Neha Bhardwaj, Katherine Rivlin, Julie Chor
{"title":"未生育患者的永久绝育:立法焦虑是手术的指征吗?","authors":"Catherine Hennessey, Camille Johnson, Hillary McLaren, Neha Bhardwaj, Katherine Rivlin, Julie Chor","doi":"10.1086/727435","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>AbstractThe Supreme Court's <i>Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization</i> decision, first leaked to the public on 2 May 2022 and officially released on 24 June 2022, overturned <i>Roe v. Wade</i> and thereby determined that abortion is no longer a federally protected right under the Constitution. Instead, the decision gives individual states the right to regulate abortion. Since the <i>Dobbs</i> decision first leaked, our institution has received numerous requests for permanent contraception from individuals stating that their motivation to pursue permanent contraception was influenced by the <i>Dobbs</i> decision and concerns about their reproductive autonomy. Discussions with patients seeking permanent contraception since the Supreme Court's leaked decision have led us to ask ourselves, is legislative anxiety an indication for surgery? This article presents a case series consisting of a convenience sample of 17 young, nulliparous individuals who sought out permanent contraception in the six months following the leak of the <i>Dobbs</i> decision. Healthcare professionals often feel discomfort in offering permanent contraception to young and nulliparous individuals. Accordingly, we discuss pertinent legal issues, review relevant ethical considerations, and offer a framework for these discussions intended to empower the consulting healthcare professional to center the bodily autonomy of every patient regardless of age, parity, or indication for permanent contraception.</p>","PeriodicalId":39646,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Ethics","volume":"34 4","pages":"320-327"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Permanent Sterilization in Nulliparous Patients: Is Legislative Anxiety an Indication for Surgery?\",\"authors\":\"Catherine Hennessey, Camille Johnson, Hillary McLaren, Neha Bhardwaj, Katherine Rivlin, Julie Chor\",\"doi\":\"10.1086/727435\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>AbstractThe Supreme Court's <i>Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization</i> decision, first leaked to the public on 2 May 2022 and officially released on 24 June 2022, overturned <i>Roe v. Wade</i> and thereby determined that abortion is no longer a federally protected right under the Constitution. Instead, the decision gives individual states the right to regulate abortion. Since the <i>Dobbs</i> decision first leaked, our institution has received numerous requests for permanent contraception from individuals stating that their motivation to pursue permanent contraception was influenced by the <i>Dobbs</i> decision and concerns about their reproductive autonomy. Discussions with patients seeking permanent contraception since the Supreme Court's leaked decision have led us to ask ourselves, is legislative anxiety an indication for surgery? This article presents a case series consisting of a convenience sample of 17 young, nulliparous individuals who sought out permanent contraception in the six months following the leak of the <i>Dobbs</i> decision. Healthcare professionals often feel discomfort in offering permanent contraception to young and nulliparous individuals. Accordingly, we discuss pertinent legal issues, review relevant ethical considerations, and offer a framework for these discussions intended to empower the consulting healthcare professional to center the bodily autonomy of every patient regardless of age, parity, or indication for permanent contraception.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":39646,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Ethics\",\"volume\":\"34 4\",\"pages\":\"320-327\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical Ethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1086/727435\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/727435","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

美国最高法院对多布斯诉杰克逊妇女健康组织案的判决于2022年5月2日首次向公众泄露,并于2022年6月24日正式公布,该判决推翻了罗伊诉韦德案,从而确定堕胎不再是宪法下受联邦保护的权利。相反,该决定赋予各州监管堕胎的权利。自从多布斯案的决定首次泄露以来,我们机构收到了许多要求永久避孕的个人的请求,他们表示,他们寻求永久避孕的动机受到多布斯案的决定和对其生殖自主权的担忧的影响。自从最高法院泄露的决定以来,与寻求永久避孕的患者的讨论让我们问自己,立法焦虑是手术的一个迹象吗?这篇文章提出了一个由17个年轻的,未生育的个体组成的方便样本的案例系列,他们在多布斯决定泄露后的六个月内寻求永久避孕。医疗保健专业人员在向年轻和未生育的人提供永久性避孕措施时经常感到不适。因此,我们讨论了相关的法律问题,审查了相关的道德考虑,并为这些讨论提供了一个框架,旨在使咨询医疗保健专业人员能够以每个患者的身体自主权为中心,而不考虑年龄、胎次或永久避孕的指示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Permanent Sterilization in Nulliparous Patients: Is Legislative Anxiety an Indication for Surgery?

AbstractThe Supreme Court's Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision, first leaked to the public on 2 May 2022 and officially released on 24 June 2022, overturned Roe v. Wade and thereby determined that abortion is no longer a federally protected right under the Constitution. Instead, the decision gives individual states the right to regulate abortion. Since the Dobbs decision first leaked, our institution has received numerous requests for permanent contraception from individuals stating that their motivation to pursue permanent contraception was influenced by the Dobbs decision and concerns about their reproductive autonomy. Discussions with patients seeking permanent contraception since the Supreme Court's leaked decision have led us to ask ourselves, is legislative anxiety an indication for surgery? This article presents a case series consisting of a convenience sample of 17 young, nulliparous individuals who sought out permanent contraception in the six months following the leak of the Dobbs decision. Healthcare professionals often feel discomfort in offering permanent contraception to young and nulliparous individuals. Accordingly, we discuss pertinent legal issues, review relevant ethical considerations, and offer a framework for these discussions intended to empower the consulting healthcare professional to center the bodily autonomy of every patient regardless of age, parity, or indication for permanent contraception.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Ethics
Journal of Clinical Ethics Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: The Journal of Clinical Ethics is written for and by physicians, nurses, attorneys, clergy, ethicists, and others whose decisions directly affect patients. More than 70 percent of the articles are authored or co-authored by physicians. JCE is a double-blinded, peer-reviewed journal indexed in PubMed, Current Contents/Social & Behavioral Sciences, the Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health Literature, and other indexes.
×
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