从宪法保护到医学伦理:多布斯之后孕妇医疗自主权的未来

Nadia N. Sawicki, Elizabeth Kukura
{"title":"从宪法保护到医学伦理:多布斯之后孕妇医疗自主权的未来","authors":"Nadia N. Sawicki, Elizabeth Kukura","doi":"10.1017/jme.2023.125","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This article argues that the Supreme Court’s decision in <span>Dobbs</span> is likely to impact medical decision-making by pregnant patients in a variety of contexts. Of particular concern are situations where a patient declines treatment recommended for its potential benefit to the fetus and situations where treatment is withheld due to potential risk to the fetus. The Court’s elevation of fetal interests, combined with a history of courts using abortion jurisprudence to guide their reasoning in compelled treatment cases, means that <span>Dobbs</span> has the potential to limit patient autonomy in a wide array of clinical settings. The article calls on professional medical associations to issue ethical guidance affirming the duty to respect the medical self-determination of pregnant patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":501694,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics","volume":"104 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"From Constitutional Protections to Medical Ethics: The Future of Pregnant Patients’ Medical Self-Determination Rights After Dobbs\",\"authors\":\"Nadia N. Sawicki, Elizabeth Kukura\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/jme.2023.125\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>This article argues that the Supreme Court’s decision in <span>Dobbs</span> is likely to impact medical decision-making by pregnant patients in a variety of contexts. Of particular concern are situations where a patient declines treatment recommended for its potential benefit to the fetus and situations where treatment is withheld due to potential risk to the fetus. The Court’s elevation of fetal interests, combined with a history of courts using abortion jurisprudence to guide their reasoning in compelled treatment cases, means that <span>Dobbs</span> has the potential to limit patient autonomy in a wide array of clinical settings. The article calls on professional medical associations to issue ethical guidance affirming the duty to respect the medical self-determination of pregnant patients.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":501694,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics\",\"volume\":\"104 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/jme.2023.125\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/jme.2023.125","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文认为,最高法院在多布斯案中的裁决可能会在各种情况下影响孕妇的医疗决策。特别值得关注的情况是,患者因对胎儿的潜在益处而拒绝建议的治疗,以及由于对胎儿的潜在风险而拒绝治疗的情况。最高法院对胎儿利益的重视,加上法院在强迫治疗案件中使用堕胎判例指导其推理的历史,意味着多布斯有可能在广泛的临床环境中限制患者的自主权。文章呼吁专业医学协会发布道德指导,确认尊重怀孕患者医疗自决的义务。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
From Constitutional Protections to Medical Ethics: The Future of Pregnant Patients’ Medical Self-Determination Rights After Dobbs

This article argues that the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs is likely to impact medical decision-making by pregnant patients in a variety of contexts. Of particular concern are situations where a patient declines treatment recommended for its potential benefit to the fetus and situations where treatment is withheld due to potential risk to the fetus. The Court’s elevation of fetal interests, combined with a history of courts using abortion jurisprudence to guide their reasoning in compelled treatment cases, means that Dobbs has the potential to limit patient autonomy in a wide array of clinical settings. The article calls on professional medical associations to issue ethical guidance affirming the duty to respect the medical self-determination of pregnant patients.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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