2013
DOI: 10.1097/01.ogx.0000427614.96651.93
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Fatally Flawed? A Review and Ethical Analysis of Lethal Congenital Malformations

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
28
0
2

Year Published

2013
2013
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(31 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
28
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…McCaffrey [2011] and Wilkinson et al [2012] call for a shift from a lethal perspective to accepting ambiguity and treating each child on an individual basis. The parental perspective is shared in Locock [2005].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…McCaffrey [2011] and Wilkinson et al [2012] call for a shift from a lethal perspective to accepting ambiguity and treating each child on an individual basis. The parental perspective is shared in Locock [2005].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The definition of a lethal malformation and its limitations has been discussed in the medical literature. Wilkinson et al summarized four possibilities, including a condition that leads to death in utero, a condition that leads to death in utero or in the newborn period regardless of treatment, a condition that leads to death in utero or in the newborn period in most cases, or a condition that leads to fetal or neonatal death in some cases. These multiple definitions can lead to ambiguity when counseling patients.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This does not mean that the savings from avoiding inappropriate treatment are not worth pursuing—simply that they are unlikely to yield large benefits for society. Third, the designation of conditions as lethal or terminal is far less clear cut than Camosy imagines 27. For one thing, six of the 16 conditions that Camosy lists (drawing on a paper by Steven Leuthner28) are associated with severe brain abnormalities, and low survival rates are heavily influenced by non-treatment decisions 29.…”
Section: Which Newborn Infants Are Too Expensive To Treat?mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For one thing, six of the 16 conditions that Camosy lists (drawing on a paper by Steven Leuthner28) are associated with severe brain abnormalities, and low survival rates are heavily influenced by non-treatment decisions 29. Prolonged survival has been described in all but one of the abnormalities that Camosy lists 27. It is simply incorrect to state that a child with trisomy 18 or holoprosencephaly ‘cannot possibly benefit’ from treatment 30.…”
Section: Which Newborn Infants Are Too Expensive To Treat?mentioning
confidence: 99%