Family-centered care in the context of fetal abnormality

Journal of Perinatal and Neonatal Nursing

Volumn 20, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 237-242

  Howard, Elisabeth D ^a  

^a WOMEN AND INFANTS HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

Background; Congenital anomaly; Fetal abnormality; Fetal surgery; Perinatal hospice; Reproductive choice; Termination

Indexed keywords

EID: 33747499785     PISSN: 08932190     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00005237-200607000-00011     Document Type: Review

References (35)

1. Peller A, Westgate M, Holmes L. Trends in congenital malformations, 1974-1999: effect of prenatal diagnosis and elective termination. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;34:244-252.
2. Sandelowski M. "Healing fictions": stories of choosing in the aftermath of the detection of fetal anomalies. Soc Sci Med. 1996;42:353-361.
3. Mitchell L. Women's experiences of unexpected ultrasound findings. J Midwifery Women's Health. 2004;49(3):228-235.
4. Evans M, Britt D. Fetal reduction from twins to a singleton: selective reduction or partial abortion? Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104(6):1424-1425.
5. Bijma HH, Wilschut HI, Van Der Heide HA, Passchier J, Vladimiroff JW, Van Der Mas PJ. Parental decision making after ultrasound diagnosis of severe fetal anomaly. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2005;20:321-327.
6. Sandelowski M, Baroso J. The travesty of choosing after a positive prenatal diagnosis. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2005;34(3):307-318.
7. Rempel GR, Gender LM, Lynam MJ, Sandor GG, Farquharson D. Parents' perspectives on decision making after antenatal diagnosis of congenital heart disease. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2004;33:64-70.
8. Meleis AI, Sawyer LM, Im E, Hilfinger N, DeAnne K, Schumacher K. Experiencing transitions: an emerging middle-range theory. Adv Nurs Sci. 2000;23(1):12-28.
9. Mercer RT. Becoming a mother versus maternal role attainment. J Nurs Sch. 2004;36(3):226-232.
10. Browner CH, Press N. The normalization of prenatal diagnostic screening. In: Ginsburg FD, Rapp R, eds. Conceiving the New World Order: The Global Politics of Reproduction. Los Angeles: University of California Press. 1995:307-322.
11. Rapp R. Testing Women, Testing the Fetus: The Social Impact of Amniocentesis in America. New York: Routledge; 2000.
12. Rothman BK. The Tentative Pregnancy. New York: Norton; 1994.
13. Marteau T. Counseling following diagnosis of a fetal abnormality: the differing approaches of obstetricians, clinical geneticists and genetic nurses. J Med Genet. 1999;31:864-867.
14. Lerman C, Croyle RT, Tercyak KP, Hamann H. Genetic testing: psychological aspects and implications. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2003;70(3):784-797.
15. Gregg R. Pregnancy in a High Tech Age: Paradoxes of Choice. New York: Routledge; 1999.
16. Grevengood C, Shulman LP, Dungan JS, et al. Severity of abnormality influences decision to terminate pregnancies affected with fetal neural tube defects. Fetal Diagn Ther. 1994;9:273-284.
17. Higgins S. Parental role in decision making about pediatric cardiac transplantation: familial and ethical considerations. J Pediatr Nurs. 2001;16(5):332-337.
18. Kenen R, Smith A, Watkins C, Zuber-Pittore C. To use or not to use: the prenatal genetic technology/worry conundrum. J Genet Counsel. 2000;9(3):203-217.
19. Gilligan C. In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women's Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1982.
20. Langer M, Ringler M. Prospective counseling after prenatal diagnosis of fetal malformations: interventions and parental reactions. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1989;68:323-329.
21. Sandelowski M, Jones L. Couples' evaluations of foreknowledge of fetal impairment. Clin Nurs Res. 1996;5(1):81-91.
22. Broen AN, Moum T, Bodtker AS. Psychological impact on women of miscarriage versus induced abortion: a 2-year follow-up study. Psychosom Med. 2004;66:265-271.
23. Zeanah C, Dailey M, Rosenglatt M, Saller S. Do women grieve after terminating pregnancies because of fetal anomalies? A controlled investigation. Obstet Gynecol. 1994;82:270-275.
24. Sandelowski M. Creating metasummaries of qualitative findings. Nurs Res. 2003;52:226-233.
25. Neville K. Uncertainty in illness: an integrative review. Orthop Nurs. 2004;22(3):206-214.
26. Schechtman KB, Gray DL, Bary JD, Rothman SM. Decision-making for termination of pregnancies with fetal anomalies of 53,000 pregnancies. Obstet Gynecol. 2002;99:216-221.
27. Layne LL. Motherhood Lost: A Feminist Account of Pregnancy Loss in America. New York: Routledge; 2003.
28. Lloyd J, Laurence K. Sequelae and support after termination of pregnancy for fetal malformation. Br Med J. 1985;290(23):907-911.
29. Matthews AL. Known fetal malformations during pregnancy: a human experience of loss. Birth Defects Orig Artic Ser. 1990;26.
30. Kolker A, Burke BM. Grieving the wanted child: ramifications of abortion after prenatal diagnosis of abnormality. Health Care Women Int. 1993;14:513-526.
31. Calhoun B, Napolitano P, Terry M. Comprehensive care for the family of the fetus with a lethal condition. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2003;58(11):718-719.
32. Chitty LS, Barnes CA, Berry C. Continuing with pregnancy after a diagnosis of lethal abnormality: experience of five couples and recommendations for management. Br Med J. 1996;313:478-480.
33. Leuther SR. Fetal palliative care. Clin Perinatol. 2004;31:649-665.
34. Bliton M. Parental hope confronting scientific uncertainty: a test of ethics in maternal-fetal surgery for spina bifida. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2005;48(3):595-607.
35. Sandelowski M. A case of conflicting paradigms: nursing and reproductive technology. Adv Nurs Sci. 1988;10(3):35-45.