Document Detail

Abortion and neonaticide: ethics, practice, and policy in four nations.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  12211246     Owner:  KIE     Status:  MEDLINE    
Abortion, particularly later-term abortion, and neonaticide, selective non-treatment of newborns, are feasible management strategies for fetuses or newborns diagnosed with severe abnormalities. However, policy varies considerably among developed nations. This article examines abortion and neonatal policy in four nations: Israel, the US, the UK and Denmark. In Israel, late-term abortion is permitted while non-treatment of newborns is prohibited. In the US, on the other hand, later-term abortion is severely restricted, while treatment to newborns may be withdrawn. Policy in the UK and Denmark bridges some of these gaps with liberal abortion and neonatal policy. Disparate policy within and between nations creates practical and ethical difficulties. Practice diverges from policy as many practitioners find it difficult to adhere to official policy. Ethically, it is difficult to entirely justify perinatal policy in these nations. In each nation, there are elements of ethically sound policy, while other aspects cannot be defended. Ethical policy hinges on two underlying normative issues: the question of fetal/newborn status and the morality of killing and letting die. While each issue has been the subject of extensive debate, there are firm ethical norms that should serve as the basis for coherent and consistent perinatal policy. These include 1) a grant of full moral and legal status to the newborn but only partial moral and legal status to the late-term fetus 2) a general prohibition against feticide unless to save the life of the mother or prevent the birth of a fetus facing certain death or severe pain or suffering and 3) a general endorsement of neonaticide subject to a parent's assessment of the newborn's interest broadly defined to consider physical harm as well as social, psychological and or financial harm to related third parties. Policies in each of the nations surveyed diverging from these norms should be the subject of public discourse and, where possible, legislative reform.
Michael L Gross
Related Documents :
872836 - Igg-subclass concentrations in cord sera from premature, full term and small-for-dates ...
14610646 - Aphid soldier differentiation: density acts on both embryos and newborn nymphs.
21388886 - A novel genomic diagnostic tool for sperm quality?
21248976 - Investigation of the infertile couple.
1714686 - The effect of weight correction on risk calculations for down's syndrome screening.
15383106 - Maternal cardiac function during pregnancy at high altitude.
Publication Detail:
Type:  Comparative Study; Journal Article    
Journal Detail:
Title:  Bioethics     Volume:  16     ISSN:  0269-9702     ISO Abbreviation:  Bioethics     Publication Date:  2002 Jun 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2002-09-03     Completed Date:  2002-09-09     Revised Date:  2007-11-15    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  8704792     Medline TA:  Bioethics     Country:  England    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  202-30     Citation Subset:  E    
Department of Political Science, The University of Haifa, Mt. Carmel, Haifa, Israel.
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Abortion, Eugenic
Abortion, Legal*
Congenital Abnormalities
Decision Making*
Developed Countries
Ethical Analysis*
Euthanasia, Passive*
Great Britain
Health Care Rationing
Infant, Newborn*
Infant, Premature*
Pregnancy Trimester, Third
Public Policy*
Quality of Life
Social Values
United States
Value of Life
Withholding Treatment

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine

Previous Document:  The fivefold root of an ethics of surgery.
Next Document:  Competence and paternalism.