This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Bruce A. Harris, Jr, MD
The University of Alabama at Birmingham

JAMA. 1985;253(22):3247.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.—

The recent study by Gleicher¹ and the comments on it by Dr Rosen² are most interesting.

It appears that all studies on cesarean delivery will be incomplete until the publication of a well-designed study relative to the influence of litigation on the obstetrician's choice of procedure. The consensus conference of 1980 was unable to reach any firm conclusion in this area. This is because there are very few data on this important subject.

When the average obstetrician is faced with a large neonate in the occiput posterior position and a questionable fetal heart tracing, it is much easier for him to do a cesarean than it is to stand by and wait for vaginal delivery—knowing that 20 years hence (when he is in his old age) he may well be the object of a malpractice suit by the child he is about to deliver. Such . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Footnotes
Edited by Drummond Rennie, MD, Senior Contributing Editor.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?