Author's reply re: Re: Re: Caesarean section should be available on request

BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology

Volumn 122, Issue 11, 2015, Pages 1571-

  Hull, Pauline M ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ATTITUDE TO PREGNANCY; CESAREAN SECTION; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; HUMAN; LETTER; MATERNAL CARE; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDICAL ETHICS; MEDICAL LITERATURE; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLISHING; SURGICAL RISK; VAGINAL DELIVERY; DECISION MAKING; ELECTIVE SURGERY; FEMALE; MOTHER; PREGNANCY; PSYCHOLOGY;

CESAREAN SECTION; DECISION MAKING; ELECTIVE SURGICAL PROCEDURES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MOTHERS; PREGNANCY;

EID: 84942525177     PISSN: 14700328     EISSN: 14710528     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.13605     Document Type: Letter

References (4)

1. Fisk NM,. Caesarean section for all patients? In:, Rafael B, Lobo R, Shoham Z, editors. Controversies in Obstetrics, Gynecology and Infertility. Bologna: Monduzzi Editore, 2002. pp. 111-115.
2. Macaskill M,. Top midwife calls for curb on caesareans. The Sunday Times, July 5, 2015. [ www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/article1577381.ece?CMP&OTH-gnws-standard-2015-07-05 ]. Accessed 5 July 2015.
3. Sharpe AN, Waring GJ, Rees J, McGarry K, Hinshaw K,. Caesarean section at maternal request-the differing views of patients and healthcare professionals: a questionnaire based study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2015; 192: 54-60.
4. Montgomery (Appellant) v Lanarkshire Health Board (Respondent) (Scotland) [2015] UKSC 11 [ www.supremecourt.uk/decided-cases/docs/UKSC-2013-0136-Judgment.pdf ]. Accessed 5 July 2015.