Cesarean delivery on maternal request: Can the ethical problem be solved by the principlist approach?

BMC Medical Ethics

Volumn 9, Issue , 2008, Pages

  Nilstun, Tore ^a   Habiba, Marwan ^b   Lingman, Göran ^a   Saracci, Rodolfo ^c   Da Frè, Monica ^d   Cuttini, Marina ^e  

^a LUND UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEICESTER   (United Kingdom)

^c CNR   (Italy)

^d Regional Agency for Healthcare Services of Tuscany   (Italy)

^e BAMBINO GESÙ CHILDREN S HOSPITAL   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CESAREAN SECTION; DOCTOR PATIENT RELATION; HUMAN; MATERNAL ATTITUDE; MATERNAL CARE; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDICAL ETHICS; PHYSICIAN ATTITUDE; RISK ASSESSMENT; VAGINAL DELIVERY; ADULT; BENEFICENCE; ECONOMICS; ELECTIVE SURGERY; ETHICS; EUROPE; FEMALE; HEALTH PERSONNEL ATTITUDE; MOTHER; PERSONAL AUTONOMY; PREGNANCY; SOCIAL JUSTICE; STATISTICS;

ADULT; ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; BENEFICENCE; CESAREAN SECTION; ETHICS, CLINICAL; EUROPE; FEMALE; HUMANS; MOTHERS; PERSONAL AUTONOMY; PHYSICIAN-PATIENT RELATIONS; PREGNANCY; PRINCIPLE-BASED ETHICS; SOCIAL JUSTICE; SURGICAL PROCEDURES, ELECTIVE;

EID: 46749126173     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14726939     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1472-6939-9-11     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Cesarean delivery on maternal request. M Viswanathan AG Visco K Hartmann ME Wechter G Gartlehner JM Wu R Palmieri MJ Funk LJ Lux T Swinson KN Lohr, Evidence Report/Technology Assessment No. 133 (Prepared by the RTI International-University of North Carolina Evidence-Based Practice Center under Contract No. 290-02-0016). AHRQ Publication No. 06-E009 Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality 2006
2. Prophylactic cesarean at term? GB Feldman JA Freiman, N Engl J Med 1985 312 1264 1267 3990727
3. Survey of obstetricians' personal preference and discretionary practice. R Al-Mufti A McCarthy NM Fisk, Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1997 73 1 4 10.1016/S0301-2115(96)02692-9 9175681
4. Should doctors perform an elective cesarean section on request? Yes, as long as the woman is fully informed. S Paterson-Brown, BMJ 1998 317 462 3 9703532
5. Should doctors perform an elective cesarean section on request? Maternal choice alone should not determine method of delivery. O Amu S Rajendran II Bolaji, BMJ 1998 317 463 5 9758469
6. Should women who elect to have Cesarean sections pay for them? (letter). IZ MacKenzie, BMJ 1999 318 1070 10205112
7. Choosing Cesarean section. M Wagner, Lancet 2000 356 1677 80 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)03169-X 11089840
8. Elective Primary Cesarean Delivery. H Minkoff FA Chervenak, N Engl J Med 2003 348 946 950 10.1056/NEJMsb022734 12621140
9. FIGO Committee Report: FIGO Committee for the Ethical Aspects of Human Reproduction and Women's Health. International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics. JG Schenker JM Cain, Int J Gynaecol Obstet 1999 64 317 22 10.1016/S0020-7292(98)00266-5 10366059
10. Caesarean section for non-medical reasons at term. T Lavender GJ Hofmeyr JP Neilson C Kingdon GML Gyte, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2006 3 Art No.: CD004660
11. Surgery and patient choice. Americal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Ethics in obstetrics and gynecology Washington (DC): American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists 2 2004
12. Cesarean delivery on maternal request. Maternal and neonatal outcomes. AG Visco M Viswanathan K Lohr ME Wechter G Gartlehner JM Wu R Palmieri M Jonsson Funk L Lux T Swinson K Hartmann, Obstet Gynecol 2006 108 1517 29 17138788
13. State-of-the-Science Conference Statement. Cesarean delivery on maternal request. National Institutes of Health, Obstet Gynecol 2006 107 1386 1397 16738168
14. Is planned cesarean childbirth a safe alternative? BA Armson, CMAJ 2007 176 475 476 17296960
15. Flemish obstetricians' personal preference regarding mode of delivery and attitude towards Cesarean section on demand. Y Jacquemyn F Ahankour G Martens, Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2003 111 164 6 10.1016/S0301-2115(03)00214-8 14597245
16. Patient preference the leading indication for elective Cesarean section in public patients - results of a 2-year prospective audit in a teaching hospital. JA Quinlivan RW Petersen CN Nichols, Aust NZ J Obstet Gynaecol 1999 39 207 214 10.1111/j.1479-828X.1999.tb03375.x
17. Cesarean delivery on maternal request in Italy. AL Tranquilli SR Giannubilo, Int J Gyn Obstet 2004 84 169 170 10.1016/S0020-7292(03)00319-9
18. Trends in maternal request cesarean delivery from 1991 to 2004. GL Gossman JM Joesch K Tanfer, Obstet Gynecol 2006 108 6 1506 1516 17138787
19. Cesarean section on request: a comparison of obstetricians' attitudes in eight European countries. M Habiba MM Gómez M da Frè M Kaminski K Marsal O Bleker for the EUROBS study group, Br J Obstet Gynaeocol 2006 113 647 56
20. End-of-life practices in European Intensive Care Units. CL Sprung SL Cohen P Sjokvist M Baras HH Bulow S Hovilehto D Ledoux A Lippert P Maia D Phelan W Schobersberger E Wennberg T Woodcock for the Ethicus Study Group, JAMA 2003 290 790 797 10.1001/jama.290.6.790 12915432
21. Forgoing life support in western European intensive care units: the results of an ethical questionnaire. JL Vincent, Crit Care Med 1999 27 1626 1633 10.1097/00003246-199908000-00042 10470775
22. TL Beauchamp JF Childress, Principles of biomedical ethics Oxford University Press 5 2001
23. From fact to recommendation: explicit value premises make the conclusions more convincing. T Nilstun P Sjökvist, J Intern Med 2001 249 121 125 10.1046/j.0954-6820.2000.00774.x 11258361
24. Medical ethics: four principles plus attention to scope. R Gillon, BMJ 1994 309 184 188 8044100
25. Methods and principles in biomedical ethics. TL Beauchamp, J Med Ethics 2003 29 269 274 14519835 10.1136/jme.29.5.269
26. In defence of moral imperialism: four equal and universal prima facie principles. A Dawson E Garrard, J Med Ethics 2006 32 200 204 10.1136/jme.2005.012591 16574872
27. International Ethical Guidelines for Biomedical Research Involving Human Subjects Geneva: CIOMS 2002
28. Maternal request cesarean versus planned spontaneous vaginal delivery: maternal morbidity and short term outcomes. JR Wax, Semin Perinatol 2006 30 247 252 10.1053/j.semperi.2006.07.003 17011394
29. Maternal mortality and severe morbidity associated with low-risk planned cesarean delivery versus planned vaginal delivery at term. L Shiliang RM Liston KS Joseph M Heaman R Sauve MS Kramer, CMAJ 2007 176 455 460 17296957
30. Maternal morbidity associated with multiple repeat cesarean deliveries. RM Silver MB Landon DJ Rouse KJ Leveno CY Spong EA Thorn, Obstet Gynecol 2006 107 1226 32 16738145
31. A systematic review of the efficacy of cesarean section in the preservation of anal continence. RL Nelson M Westercamp SE Furner, Dis Colon Rectum 2006 49 1587 1595 10.1007/s10350-006-0660-9 17006613
32. Does cesarean section reduce postpartum urinary incontinence? A systematic review. JZ Press MC Klein J Kaczorowski RM Liston P von Dadelszen, Birth 2007 34 228 236 10.1111/j.1523-536X.2007.00175.x 17718873
33. Women's role and satisfaction in the decision to have a cesarean section. DA Turnbull C Wilkinson A Yaser V Carty JM Svigos JS Robnson, Med J Aust 1999 170 580 583 10416426
34. Neonatal impact of elective repeat cesarean delivery at term: a comment on patient choice cesarean delivery. NS Fogelson MK Menard T Hulsey M Ebeling, Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005 192 1433 1436 10.1016/j.ajog.2005.01.010 15902129
35. Fetal injury associated with cesarean delivery. JM Alexander KJ Leveno J Hauth MB Landon E Thom CY Spong MW Varner AH Moawad SN Caritis M Harper RJ Wapner Y Sorokin M Miodovnik MJ O'Sullivan BM Sibai O Langer SG Gabbe for the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network, Obstet Gynecol 2006 108 885 890 17012450
36. Infant and neonatal mortality for primary cesarean and vaginal births to women with "no indicated risk", United States, 1998-2001 birth cohorts. MF MacDorman E Declerq F Menacker MH Malloy, Birth 2006 33 175 182 10.1111/j.1523-536X.2006.00102.x 16948717
37. Planned cesarean versus planned vaginal delivery at term: conmparison of newborn infant outcomes. T Kolås OD Sauhstad AK Daltveit ST Nilsen P Øian, Am J Obstet Gynecol 2006 195 1538 43 10.1016/j.ajog.2006.05.005 16846577
38. Cesarean section on request at 39 weeks: impact on shoulder dystocia, fetal trauma, neonatal encephalopathy, and intrauterine fetal demise. GDV Hankins SM Clark MB Munn, Semin Perinatol 2006 30 276 287 10.1053/j.semperi. 2006.07.009 17011400
39. Exclusive versus predominant breastfeeding in Italian maternity wards and feeding practices through the first year of life. M Giovannini E Riva G Banderali M Salvioni G Radaelli C Agostoni, J Hum Lact 2005 21 259 265 10.1177/0890334405277898 16113014
40. Little human guinea-pigs? RM Hare, Moral dilemmas in modern medicine Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, Lockwood M, 1985 76 91
41. Association between rising professional liability insurance premiums and primary cesarean delivery rates. K Murthy WA Grobman TA Lee JL Holl, Obstet Gynecol 2007 110 1264 9 18055719
42. Professional liability issues and practice patterns of obstetric providers in Washington State. TJ Benedetti LM Baldwin SM Skillman CHA Andrilla E Bowditch KC Camacho SJ Myers, Obstet Gynecol 2006 107 1238 46 16738147
43. The effect of physician factors on the caesarean section decision. LR Burns SE Geller DR Wholey, Med Care 1995 33 365 82 10.1097/00005650-199504000- 00004 7731278
44. The economic costs of alternative models of delivery during the first two months postpartum: results from a Scottish observational study. S Petrou C Glazener, BJOG 2002 109 214 217 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2002.01032.x 11888105
45. Cesarean delivery on maternal request: wise use of finite resources? A view from the trenches. ML Druzin YY El-Sayed, Semin Perinatol 2006 30 305 08 10.1053/j.semperi.2006.07.012 17011403
46. Cesarean delivery on demand: what will it cost? BW Bost, Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003 188 1418 1423 10.1067/mob.2003.455 12824972
47. Public health implications of cesarean on demand. LA Plante, Obstet Gynecol Surv 2006 61 807 815 10.1097/01.ogx.0000248826.44123.73 17107630
48. On liberty. JS Mill, London 1859
49. Patient refusal of emergency cesarean delivery: a study of obstetricians' attitudes in Europe. M Cuttini M Habiba T Nilstun S Donfrancesco M Garel C Arnaud O Bleker M Da Fre MM Gomez W Heyl K Marsal R Saracci for the EUROBS study group, Obstet Gynecol 2006 108 1121 1129 17077233
50. Cesarean section by choice: constructing a reproductive rights framework for the debate. JE Christilaw, Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2006 94 262 268 10.1016/j.ijgo.2006.04.006 16842789
51. Trends in risk factors for cesarean sections in France between 1981 and 1995: lessons for reducing the rates in the future. P Guihard B Blondel, BJOG 2001 108 48 55 10.1016/S0306-5456(00)00009-7 11213004
52. Making sense of rising cesarean section rates. GM Anderson, BMJ 2004 329 696 697 15388590 10.1136/bmj.329.7468.696
53. RR Faden TL Beaucham, A History and Theory of Informed Consent New York, Oxford: University Press 1986
54. Are Brazilian women really choosing to deliver by cesarean? K Hopkins, Soc Sci Med 2000 51 725 740 10.1016/S0277-9536(99)00480-3 10975232
55. Counseling women about choice. LH Harris, Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2001 15 93 107 10.1053/beog.2000.0151 11359317
56. It is every woman's right to choose to be delivered by elective caesarean section. KJ Erskine, Int J Obstet Anesth 1999 8 43 8 10.1016/S0959-289X(99) 80151-4 15321175
57. Elective caesarean section and decision-making: a critical review of the literature. C McCourt J Weaver H Statham S Beake J Gamble DK Creedy, Birth 2007 34 65 79 10.1111/j.1523-536X.2006.00147.x 17324181
58. The ethics of caesarean section on maternal request: a feminist critique of the Americal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists' position on patient-choice surgery. V Bergeron, Bioethics 2007 21 478 487 10.1111/j.1467-8519.2007.00593.x 17927624