多胎妊娠中堕胎的变化。

IF 0.5 4区 医学 Q3 LAW
Issues in Law & Medicine Pub Date : 2022-01-01
Gregory K Pike
{"title":"多胎妊娠中堕胎的变化。","authors":"Gregory K Pike","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The selective termination of one or more fetuses in higher order multiple pregnancies began in the 1980s in response to the increased rate of multiples arising from assisted reproductive technology (ART). Multifetal Pregnancy Reduction (MFPR) was justified by improving outcomes for the remaining offspring and their mother, and while the evidence suggests prematurity and the morbidity associated with it are reduced, there is a cost in increased miscarriage and mortality. As perinatal care has advanced, the margins of improvement have narrowed and hence the cost/benefit ratio. At the same time, MFPR has morphed from a rare procedure undertaken for quadruplets and higher, to one in which triplets and twins are increasingly reduced to a singleton, and more so for social reasons. This review considers the evidence for MFPR's efficacy and risks, along with those changes over time. Notably absent is research on the surviving children or the ongoing physical and mental health of mothers. The ethical reasoning used by practitioners and others is also explored, as is the culture of ART and abortion that drive the practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":48665,"journal":{"name":"Issues in Law & Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Changing Face of Feticide in Multiple Pregnancies.\",\"authors\":\"Gregory K Pike\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The selective termination of one or more fetuses in higher order multiple pregnancies began in the 1980s in response to the increased rate of multiples arising from assisted reproductive technology (ART). Multifetal Pregnancy Reduction (MFPR) was justified by improving outcomes for the remaining offspring and their mother, and while the evidence suggests prematurity and the morbidity associated with it are reduced, there is a cost in increased miscarriage and mortality. As perinatal care has advanced, the margins of improvement have narrowed and hence the cost/benefit ratio. At the same time, MFPR has morphed from a rare procedure undertaken for quadruplets and higher, to one in which triplets and twins are increasingly reduced to a singleton, and more so for social reasons. This review considers the evidence for MFPR's efficacy and risks, along with those changes over time. Notably absent is research on the surviving children or the ongoing physical and mental health of mothers. The ethical reasoning used by practitioners and others is also explored, as is the culture of ART and abortion that drive the practice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48665,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Issues in Law & Medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Issues in Law & Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Issues in Law & Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

高次多胎妊娠的选择性终止一个或多个胎儿始于20世纪80年代,以应对辅助生殖技术(ART)引起的多胎率上升。减少多胎妊娠(MFPR)是合理的,因为它改善了剩余后代及其母亲的结局,虽然有证据表明早产及其相关的发病率降低了,但流产和死亡率的增加是有代价的。随着围产期护理的进步,改善的余地缩小了,因此成本/效益比也缩小了。与此同时,MFPR已经从一种罕见的四胞胎或更高的程序演变为三胞胎和双胞胎越来越多地减少到单胎,更多的是出于社会原因。本综述考虑了MFPR疗效和风险的证据,以及这些随时间的变化。值得注意的是,没有对幸存儿童或母亲持续的身心健康进行研究。还探讨了从业人员和其他人使用的道德推理,以及推动这种做法的ART和堕胎文化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Changing Face of Feticide in Multiple Pregnancies.

The selective termination of one or more fetuses in higher order multiple pregnancies began in the 1980s in response to the increased rate of multiples arising from assisted reproductive technology (ART). Multifetal Pregnancy Reduction (MFPR) was justified by improving outcomes for the remaining offspring and their mother, and while the evidence suggests prematurity and the morbidity associated with it are reduced, there is a cost in increased miscarriage and mortality. As perinatal care has advanced, the margins of improvement have narrowed and hence the cost/benefit ratio. At the same time, MFPR has morphed from a rare procedure undertaken for quadruplets and higher, to one in which triplets and twins are increasingly reduced to a singleton, and more so for social reasons. This review considers the evidence for MFPR's efficacy and risks, along with those changes over time. Notably absent is research on the surviving children or the ongoing physical and mental health of mothers. The ethical reasoning used by practitioners and others is also explored, as is the culture of ART and abortion that drive the practice.

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
Issues in Law & Medicine
Issues in Law & Medicine Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Issues in Law & Medicine is a peer reviewed professional journal published semiannually. Founded in 1985, ILM is co-sponsored by the National Legal Center for the Medically Dependent & Disabled, Inc. and the Watson Bowes Research Institute. Issues is devoted to providing technical and informational assistance to attorneys, health care professionals, educators and administrators on legal, medical, and ethical issues arising from health care decisions. Its subscribers include law libraries, medical libraries, university libraries, court libraries, attorneys, physicians, university professors and other scholars, primarily in the U.S. and Canada, but also in Austria, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Italy, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Japan, Russia, South Korea, Spain, Taiwan, and the United Kingdom.
×
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