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

Stephen E. Whitney, MD
Houston

JAMA. 1988;260(1):31.

	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.—

I was profoundly distressed with the ethical reasoning expressed in Nelson and Milliken's article.¹ The authors correctly state that the issues of fetal rights, legal and ethical, are hotly debated. It is understandable that physicians would seek the help of the courts to judge what is the just course of action when a fetus' health or life is jeopardized by its mother's behavior.

The authors' contention that to seek a court ruling on life and death issues is unethical because it invades the mother's privacy is a gross distortion of ethical reasoning. Any issue brought to judicial review, whether criminal or civil, involves a discovery process that invades one's privacy. Certainly the mother might be psychologically ill-disposed to defend her choices while pregnant, but the psychological states of a person standing trial in a criminal action or of the parties in a contested divorce are no . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

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