Parental rights at the birth of a near-viable infant: Conflicting perspectives

J. V. Pinkerton, J. J. Finnerty, P. A. Lombardo, M. V. Rorty, H. Chapple, R. J. Boyle, D. L. Musgrave, J. T. Christmas, Lawrence D Devoe, Jr Thorp, J. E. Maher

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

33 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to clarify the roles of parents and caregivers in making decisions for resuscitation of near-viable infants. STUDY DESIGN: We present two cases and review ethical and legal issues involved in making decisions for near-viable infants. RESULTS: Medical responsibility for the infant shifts at birth from obstetrics to neonatology. Neonatologists will 'opt for life' when prognosis is uncertain. As surrogate decision makers, parents have rights to make decisions about initiation of resuscitation, but these parental rights are limited by the infant's best interests. If caregivers believe parents are not acting in the infant's best interests, they may persuade parents, challenge parental refusal by petitioning the courts, or treat without consent with possible legal risk. CONCLUSIONS: Effective communication is essential to prevent misunderstanding and conflicts. In most instances parents are the best decision makers for a near-viable infant. Parental rights are limited by best interests of the infant.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)283-290
Number of pages8
JournalAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Volume177
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1997
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Parturition
Parents
Caregivers
Decision Making
Resuscitation Orders
Neonatology
Resuscitation
Ethics
Obstetrics
Communication

Keywords

  • Best interests of infant
  • Near-viable infants
  • Parental rights
  • Resuscitation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Obstetrics and Gynecology

Cite this

Pinkerton, J. V., Finnerty, J. J., Lombardo, P. A., Rorty, M. V., Chapple, H., Boyle, R. J., ... Maher, J. E. (1997). Parental rights at the birth of a near-viable infant: Conflicting perspectives. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 177(2), 283-290. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9378(97)70188-1

Parental rights at the birth of a near-viable infant : Conflicting perspectives. / Pinkerton, J. V.; Finnerty, J. J.; Lombardo, P. A.; Rorty, M. V.; Chapple, H.; Boyle, R. J.; Musgrave, D. L.; Christmas, J. T.; Devoe, Lawrence D; Thorp, Jr; Maher, J. E.

In: American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Vol. 177, No. 2, 01.01.1997, p. 283-290.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Pinkerton, JV, Finnerty, JJ, Lombardo, PA, Rorty, MV, Chapple, H, Boyle, RJ, Musgrave, DL, Christmas, JT, Devoe, LD, Thorp, J & Maher, JE 1997, 'Parental rights at the birth of a near-viable infant: Conflicting perspectives', American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, vol. 177, no. 2, pp. 283-290. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9378(97)70188-1
Pinkerton, J. V. ; Finnerty, J. J. ; Lombardo, P. A. ; Rorty, M. V. ; Chapple, H. ; Boyle, R. J. ; Musgrave, D. L. ; Christmas, J. T. ; Devoe, Lawrence D ; Thorp, Jr ; Maher, J. E. / Parental rights at the birth of a near-viable infant : Conflicting perspectives. In: American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 1997 ; Vol. 177, No. 2. pp. 283-290.
@article{d688ce49e2634cbc9343c639b5d8fad8,
title = "Parental rights at the birth of a near-viable infant: Conflicting perspectives",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to clarify the roles of parents and caregivers in making decisions for resuscitation of near-viable infants. STUDY DESIGN: We present two cases and review ethical and legal issues involved in making decisions for near-viable infants. RESULTS: Medical responsibility for the infant shifts at birth from obstetrics to neonatology. Neonatologists will 'opt for life' when prognosis is uncertain. As surrogate decision makers, parents have rights to make decisions about initiation of resuscitation, but these parental rights are limited by the infant's best interests. If caregivers believe parents are not acting in the infant's best interests, they may persuade parents, challenge parental refusal by petitioning the courts, or treat without consent with possible legal risk. CONCLUSIONS: Effective communication is essential to prevent misunderstanding and conflicts. In most instances parents are the best decision makers for a near-viable infant. Parental rights are limited by best interests of the infant.",
keywords = "Best interests of infant, Near-viable infants, Parental rights, Resuscitation",
author = "Pinkerton, {J. V.} and Finnerty, {J. J.} and Lombardo, {P. A.} and Rorty, {M. V.} and H. Chapple and Boyle, {R. J.} and Musgrave, {D. L.} and Christmas, {J. T.} and Devoe, {Lawrence D} and Jr Thorp and Maher, {J. E.}",
year = "1997",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/S0002-9378(97)70188-1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "177",
pages = "283--290",
journal = "American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology",
issn = "0002-9378",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Parental rights at the birth of a near-viable infant

T2 - Conflicting perspectives

AU - Pinkerton, J. V.

AU - Finnerty, J. J.

AU - Lombardo, P. A.

AU - Rorty, M. V.

AU - Chapple, H.

AU - Boyle, R. J.

AU - Musgrave, D. L.

AU - Christmas, J. T.

AU - Devoe, Lawrence D

AU - Thorp, Jr

AU - Maher, J. E.

PY - 1997/1/1

Y1 - 1997/1/1

N2 - OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to clarify the roles of parents and caregivers in making decisions for resuscitation of near-viable infants. STUDY DESIGN: We present two cases and review ethical and legal issues involved in making decisions for near-viable infants. RESULTS: Medical responsibility for the infant shifts at birth from obstetrics to neonatology. Neonatologists will 'opt for life' when prognosis is uncertain. As surrogate decision makers, parents have rights to make decisions about initiation of resuscitation, but these parental rights are limited by the infant's best interests. If caregivers believe parents are not acting in the infant's best interests, they may persuade parents, challenge parental refusal by petitioning the courts, or treat without consent with possible legal risk. CONCLUSIONS: Effective communication is essential to prevent misunderstanding and conflicts. In most instances parents are the best decision makers for a near-viable infant. Parental rights are limited by best interests of the infant.

AB - OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to clarify the roles of parents and caregivers in making decisions for resuscitation of near-viable infants. STUDY DESIGN: We present two cases and review ethical and legal issues involved in making decisions for near-viable infants. RESULTS: Medical responsibility for the infant shifts at birth from obstetrics to neonatology. Neonatologists will 'opt for life' when prognosis is uncertain. As surrogate decision makers, parents have rights to make decisions about initiation of resuscitation, but these parental rights are limited by the infant's best interests. If caregivers believe parents are not acting in the infant's best interests, they may persuade parents, challenge parental refusal by petitioning the courts, or treat without consent with possible legal risk. CONCLUSIONS: Effective communication is essential to prevent misunderstanding and conflicts. In most instances parents are the best decision makers for a near-viable infant. Parental rights are limited by best interests of the infant.

KW - Best interests of infant

KW - Near-viable infants

KW - Parental rights

KW - Resuscitation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0030884412&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0030884412&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S0002-9378(97)70188-1

DO - 10.1016/S0002-9378(97)70188-1

M3 - Article

C2 - 9290441

AN - SCOPUS:0030884412

VL - 177

SP - 283

EP - 290

JO - American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology

JF - American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology

SN - 0002-9378

IS - 2

ER -