The parturient woman: Can there be room for more than 'one person with full and equal rights inside a single human skin'?

Journal of Advanced Nursing

Volumn 33, Issue 5, 2001, Pages 689-695

  Burrows, Julia ^a,b  

^a SHEFFIELD HEALTH AND SOCIAL CARE NHS FOUNDATION TRUST   (United Kingdom)

^b NONE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Autonomy; Caesarean section; Capacity; Consent; Ethical duty; Foetal rights; Legal duty; Maternal rights

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CESAREAN SECTION; FEMALE; FREEDOM; GENETICS AND REPRODUCTION; HUMAN; HUMAN RIGHTS; INDIVIDUALITY; LEGAL APPROACH; LEGAL ASPECT; MEDICAL ETHICS; MENTAL CAPACITY; PREGNANCY; PROFESSIONAL PATIENT RELATIONSHIP; TREATMENT REFUSAL; UNITED KINGDOM; UNITED STATES;

GENETICS AND REPRODUCTION; LEGAL APPROACH; PROFESSIONAL PATIENT RELATIONSHIP;

CESAREAN SECTION; ETHICS, MEDICAL; FEMALE; FREEDOM; GREAT BRITAIN; HUMAN RIGHTS; HUMANS; INDIVIDUALITY; MENTAL COMPETENCY; PREGNANCY; TREATMENT REFUSAL; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0035293091     PISSN: 03092402     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2648.2001.01700.x     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Aveyard H. (2000) Is there a concept of autonomy that can usefully inform nursing practice? Journal of Advanced Nursing 32, 352-358.
2. Barrett J.F. (1990) Inconsistencies in clinical decisions in obstetrics. The Lancet 337, 549-551.
3. Barrett J.F., Jarvis G.J., MacDonald H.N., Buchanen P.C., Tyrell S.N. & Lilford R. (1990) Inconsistencies in clinical decisions in obstetrics. The Lancet 337 (8714), 549-551.
4. Cahill H. (1999) An Orwellian scenario: court ordered caesaraen section and women's autonomy. Nursing Ethics 6, 494-505.
5. Churchill H. (1997) Caesarean Birth. Experience, Practice and History. Midwives press, Cheshire, 89-97.
6. Clement S. (1991) The Caesarean Experience. Pandora Press, London, 93-110.
7. DOH (1993) Changing Childbirth. Department of Health, London.
8. DOH (1998) Changing Childbirth: Development Projects Summary Report. Department of Health, NHS Executive, Leeds.
9. Delaney L. (1998) Responsibility and capacity. Health Care Risk Report. May 1998, 7-9.
10. Draper H. (1996) Women, forced caesareans and antenatal responsibilities. Journal of Medical Ethics 22, 327-333.
11. Fovargue S. & Miola J. (1998) Policing pregnancy: implications of the attorney-general's reference (no. 3 of 1994). Medical law Review (Autumn 1998) 6, 265-296.
12. Gillon R. (1985) Autonomy and consent. In Moral Dilemmas in Modern Medicine (Lockwood M. ed.), Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 114-117.
13. Hewson B. (1996) Women's rights and legal wrongs. New Law Journal (September) 27, 1385-1386.
14. Howarth D. (1995) Textbook on Tort. Butterworths, London.
15. Kennedy I. (1997) Consent: adult, refusal of consent, capacity. Re MB (Medical Treatment): commentary. Medical Law Review (Autumn) 5, 317-325.
16. Kolder V., Gallagher B. & Parsons M. (1987) Court-ordered obstetrical interventions, New England Journal of Medicine 316, 1192.
17. The Law Commission (1995) Mental Incapacity. Law Com no. 231, HMSO, London
18. Lord Chancellor's Department (1997) Who Decides? Making Decisions on Behalf of Mentally Incapacitated Adults. Consultation paper 1997, Cm 3803. The Stationery Office, London.
19. Lord Justice Thorpe (1997) The caesarean section debate. Family Law, October, 663-664.
20. Mason J.K. & McCall Smith R.A. (1999) Law and Medical Ethics, 5th edn. Butterworths, London.
21. McAleese S. (2000) Caesarean section for Maternal Choice? Midwifery Matters, Spring, Issue no. 84.
22. McHale J.V. (1997) Health Care Law: Text and Materials. Sweet & Maxwell, London.
23. Miller L. (1993) Two patients or one? Problems of consent in obstetrics. Medical Law International 1, 97-112.
24. Morris A. & Nott S. (1995) The law's engagement with pregnancy. In Law and Body Politics: Regulating the Female Body (Bridgeman J. & Millns S. eds), Dartmouth, Aldershot, pp. 53-78.
25. Plomer A. (1997) Judicially enforced caesareans and the sanctity of life. Anglo-American Law Review 26, 235-271.
26. Puxon M. (1997) Re MB (CA): comment [1997]. Medical Law Review 8, 228.
27. Royal College of Obstetricians & Gynaecologists Ethics Committee (1994) A Consideration of the Law and Ethics in Relation to Court-Authorised Obstetric Intervention. RCOG, London.
28. Sabrine N. (2000) Elective caesarean can increase the risk to the foetus. BMJ, (5 April) 320, 1072.
29. Stern K. (1993) Court-ordered caesarean sections. In whose interests? The Modern Law Review (March) 56, 238-243.
30. Thomson M. (1994) After Re S. Medical Law Review (Summer) 2, 127-148.
31. Warren M. (1990) The moral significance of birth. Hypatia 4, 46-65 (out of print, cited in Wells & Morgan 1991).
32. Wells C. & Morgan D. (1991) Whose foetus is it? Journal of Law and Society 18, 431-447.