罗伊诉韦德案的逆转及其对新生儿护理法律限制的影响。

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q2 PEDIATRICS
Current opinion in pediatrics Pub Date : 2025-04-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-07 DOI:10.1097/MOP.0000000000001445
Christine E Bishop, Maya Manian
{"title":"罗伊诉韦德案的逆转及其对新生儿护理法律限制的影响。","authors":"Christine E Bishop, Maya Manian","doi":"10.1097/MOP.0000000000001445","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>This review examines the implications of the 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision on neonatal care and explores how legal restrictions on abortion are influencing medical practices for neonates and the broader healthcare landscape for neonates.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>The Dobbs decision has led to increased uncertainty and challenges in both maternal and neonatal healthcare. Restrictive abortion laws are associated with higher infant mortality rates, increased health disparity, and increased care provider ethical dilemmas and moral distress due to legal uncertainty surrounding the care of infants. However, current changes in federal and state law regarding abortion do not change the previously established standard of care for neonates. Other federal legal statutes potentially addressing the care of neonates have existed for over 20 years and have had minimal effect on the practice of neonatology, because there is no record of federal enforcement actions or federal case law to clarify how the law should be interpreted.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>While restrictive abortion laws primarily affect women and pregnant people's health care, indirect effects on neonatal care are becoming more common. There are other laws and policies with greater potential to regulate care for infants at the federal and state level. Professional medical standards remain the guiding framework in neonatal care. Clinicians can mitigate legal concerns through knowledge and advocacy.</p>","PeriodicalId":10985,"journal":{"name":"Current opinion in pediatrics","volume":" ","pages":"165-172"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reversal of Roe v. Wade and implications of legal restrictions for neonatal care.\",\"authors\":\"Christine E Bishop, Maya Manian\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/MOP.0000000000001445\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>This review examines the implications of the 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision on neonatal care and explores how legal restrictions on abortion are influencing medical practices for neonates and the broader healthcare landscape for neonates.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>The Dobbs decision has led to increased uncertainty and challenges in both maternal and neonatal healthcare. Restrictive abortion laws are associated with higher infant mortality rates, increased health disparity, and increased care provider ethical dilemmas and moral distress due to legal uncertainty surrounding the care of infants. However, current changes in federal and state law regarding abortion do not change the previously established standard of care for neonates. Other federal legal statutes potentially addressing the care of neonates have existed for over 20 years and have had minimal effect on the practice of neonatology, because there is no record of federal enforcement actions or federal case law to clarify how the law should be interpreted.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>While restrictive abortion laws primarily affect women and pregnant people's health care, indirect effects on neonatal care are becoming more common. There are other laws and policies with greater potential to regulate care for infants at the federal and state level. Professional medical standards remain the guiding framework in neonatal care. Clinicians can mitigate legal concerns through knowledge and advocacy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10985,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current opinion in pediatrics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"165-172\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current opinion in pediatrics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/MOP.0000000000001445\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/2/7 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PEDIATRICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current opinion in pediatrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MOP.0000000000001445","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

综述目的:本综述探讨了2022年Dobbs v. Jackson妇女健康组织对新生儿护理的决定的含义,并探讨了堕胎的法律限制如何影响新生儿的医疗实践和更广泛的新生儿医疗保健前景。最近的发现:多布斯的决定已经导致增加的不确定性和挑战,在产妇和新生儿保健。限制性堕胎法与更高的婴儿死亡率、更大的健康差距以及由于围绕婴儿护理的法律不确定性而增加的护理提供者伦理困境和道德困境有关。然而,目前联邦和州关于堕胎的法律的变化并没有改变以前建立的新生儿护理标准。其他可能涉及新生儿护理的联邦法律法规已经存在了20多年,对新生儿学实践的影响微乎其微,因为没有联邦执法行动或联邦判例法的记录来阐明法律应该如何解释。摘要:虽然限制性堕胎法主要影响妇女和孕妇的保健,但对新生儿护理的间接影响也越来越普遍。在联邦和州一级,还有其他更有可能规范婴儿护理的法律和政策。专业医疗标准仍然是新生儿护理的指导框架。临床医生可以通过知识和宣传来减轻法律问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reversal of Roe v. Wade and implications of legal restrictions for neonatal care.

Purpose of review: This review examines the implications of the 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision on neonatal care and explores how legal restrictions on abortion are influencing medical practices for neonates and the broader healthcare landscape for neonates.

Recent findings: The Dobbs decision has led to increased uncertainty and challenges in both maternal and neonatal healthcare. Restrictive abortion laws are associated with higher infant mortality rates, increased health disparity, and increased care provider ethical dilemmas and moral distress due to legal uncertainty surrounding the care of infants. However, current changes in federal and state law regarding abortion do not change the previously established standard of care for neonates. Other federal legal statutes potentially addressing the care of neonates have existed for over 20 years and have had minimal effect on the practice of neonatology, because there is no record of federal enforcement actions or federal case law to clarify how the law should be interpreted.

Summary: While restrictive abortion laws primarily affect women and pregnant people's health care, indirect effects on neonatal care are becoming more common. There are other laws and policies with greater potential to regulate care for infants at the federal and state level. Professional medical standards remain the guiding framework in neonatal care. Clinicians can mitigate legal concerns through knowledge and advocacy.

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
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
184
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: ​​​​​Current Opinion in Pediatrics is a reader-friendly resource which allows the reader to keep up-to-date with the most important advances in the pediatric field. Each issue of Current Opinion in Pediatrics contains three main sections delivering a diverse and comprehensive cover of all key issues related to pediatrics; including genetics, therapeutics and toxicology, adolescent medicine, neonatology and perinatology, and orthopedics. Unique to Current Opinion in Pediatrics is the office pediatrics section which appears in every issue and covers popular topics such as fever, immunization and ADHD. Current Opinion in Pediatrics is an indispensable journal for the busy clinician, researcher or student.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信