Safeguards for procedural consent in obstetric care

Journal of Medical Ethics 49 (9):628-629 (2023)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Van der Pijl et al outline data suggesting an alarmingly high incidence of violation of the bodily integrity of patients in labour, including episiotomies performed without patients’ consent, or over their explicit objection.1 Similar data have been reported from the USA and Canada.2 The authors appropriately conclude that explicit consent is required at the time of all invasive obstetrical procedures, including episiotomy. Commonsense adjustments to the duration and detail of consent under conditions of clinical urgency are appropriate and should be familiar to any clinician involved in perinatal care, as well as non-obstetric proceduralists caring for acutely ill patients. However, complete omission of consent for any of these procedures is both disrespectful to patients’ autonomy and strongly associated with morbidity from birth-related psychosocial trauma.3–5 The true incidence of obstetrical procedures performed without patients’ consent is difficult to determine for multiple reasons, including sample selection, recall bias and patients’ reluctance to reengage with traumatic experiences; however, …

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,438

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Moral implications of obstetric technologies for pregnancy and motherhood.Susanne Brauer - 2016 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 19 (1):45-54.
Consent in the law.Deryck Beyleveld - 2007 - Oxford: Hart. Edited by Roger Brownsword.

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-06-22

Downloads
5 (#1,522,914)

6 months
4 (#790,778)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?