Search

Objective: To evaluate the caregivers' opinions regarding decision-making in termination of pregnancy (TOP) for fetal anomaly., Material and Methods: Questionnaire survey using a semi-structured survey based on visual analogue scales, sent to all multidisciplinary centres for prenatal diagnosis in France. Answers were received from 26 centres nation-wide., Results: Response rate was 39% (213 responses received over 550 questionnaires sent). Fifty-five percent of respondents were women, 90% physicians, 7,5% midwives. A vast majority (69.8%) believes that their own convictions play a bigger role in decision in real practice than in their ideal. The major decisional factors in decision-making for TOP are: the long-term prognosis of the anomaly, a specialized opinion on its curability, the quality of the information given to the future parents, their expressed opinion, the existence of a multidisciplinary decision, the ability of the future parents to understand the medical data, the obtention of a medical consensus, the proof level of the medical information. For only 55% of the respondents, the current legal framework is adequate to manage the situations that result from prenatal diagnostic practices today. The question of late third-trimester TOP raises ethical debate: over a third (37%) see no ethical difference between TOP and withdrawal of care during the neonatal period; the majority (48% versus 43%) feel that ethically speaking a neonate and a foetus at 39 weeks gestational age (GA) should not be treated differently; 37% of the respondents feel that current practice is likely to lead to eugenism., Discussion and Conclusion: As far as TOP is concerned, the huge discrepancies in responses from the professionals highlight the ongoing ethical debate, especially concerning the concept of informed choice in TOP, which we believe should be entirely revisited., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To explicate the ontological statuses of both the fetus and neonate as a basis for clinical ethical judgments about the obligations of both physicians and pregnant women to protect the life and health of both the fetus and the neonate., Methods: Despite drastic changes in perinatology, there is still a legal separation between fetuses and neonates. Neonatal status remains specific because of the prohibition of 'transgressing human life'. Nevertheless, the concept of a 'prenatal human being' recently emerged. While new technologies blur the fetus/neonate borderline, why is it still legal in many European countries to terminate a fetal life in the late stages of pregnancy? One might even support the idea that what is authorized before birth should also be after, thereby 'fetalizing' neonates., Results: The 'personalistic' approach is against this 'fetalization', considering that terminating a neonate life is 'transgressive'. The 'utilitarian' model considers we cannot decide what is good for someone else, which justifies terminating the life of neonates who are not persons yet. A phenomenological view supports the ontological difference on our perceptions, differing whether we observe ultrasound fetal images or real neonatal pictures., Conclusion: This does not mean the weight of fetal images should be underestimated., (Copyright © 2011 S. Karger AG, Basel.)