Forced cesareans
This review attempts primarily to provide guidance to physicians and others who may face the dilemma raised by a patient who refuses a recommended cesarean. This is, therefore, not a traditional literature review. The ethical-legal nature of the topic necessitates a different approach. Accordingly,...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Current opinion in obstetrics & gynecology 1998-12, Vol.10 (6), p.465-468 |
|---|---|
| 1. Verfasser: | |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 468 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 6 |
| container_start_page | 465 |
| container_title | Current opinion in obstetrics & gynecology |
| container_volume | 10 |
| creator | Ikemoto, L C |
| description | This review attempts primarily to provide guidance to physicians and others who may face the dilemma raised by a patient who refuses a recommended cesarean. This is, therefore, not a traditional literature review. The ethical-legal nature of the topic necessitates a different approach. Accordingly, this review briefly describes two recent cases in which courts have reversed orders to override a woman's refusal of consent, suggests different ways in which medical practice trends and emerging medical data may be implicated in forced cesarean cases, and then considers the implications of recent cases in the light of social-political factors. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1097/00001703-199812000-00006 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_69101199</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>69101199</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c310t-b289ad1c052b31ddd5333e2eaae4dda1db6179deafb41fe2d3b16f574118bf1c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo9UE1LAzEQzUGptQr-AaEnb6szyW42OUqxKhS8KHgL-ZhAZdutSffgvze1a-cyzOO9ebzH2BzhHkG3D1AGWxAVaq2Ql6s6QPKMTRFqqFTLPy_YZc5fhcc1qAmbaCUlYD1lN8s-eQpzT9kmstt8xc6j7TJdj3vGPpZP74uXavX2_Lp4XFVeIOwrx5W2AT003AkMITRCCOJkLdUhWAxOYqsD2ehqjMSDcChj09aIykX0Ysbujn93qf8eKO_NZp09dZ3dUj9kIzUClkSFqI5En_qcE0WzS-uNTT8GwRwKMP8FmFMBf5As0tvRY3AbCifhmF78AlOTVtg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>69101199</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Forced cesareans</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Journals@Ovid Complete</source><creator>Ikemoto, L C</creator><creatorcontrib>Ikemoto, L C</creatorcontrib><description>This review attempts primarily to provide guidance to physicians and others who may face the dilemma raised by a patient who refuses a recommended cesarean. This is, therefore, not a traditional literature review. The ethical-legal nature of the topic necessitates a different approach. Accordingly, this review briefly describes two recent cases in which courts have reversed orders to override a woman's refusal of consent, suggests different ways in which medical practice trends and emerging medical data may be implicated in forced cesarean cases, and then considers the implications of recent cases in the light of social-political factors.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1040-872X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1097/00001703-199812000-00006</identifier><identifier>PMID: 9866014</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England</publisher><subject>Cesarean Section ; Ethics, Medical ; Female ; Humans ; Informed Consent - legislation & jurisprudence ; Los Angeles ; Pregnancy ; Treatment Refusal - legislation & jurisprudence ; United States</subject><ispartof>Current opinion in obstetrics & gynecology, 1998-12, Vol.10 (6), p.465-468</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c310t-b289ad1c052b31ddd5333e2eaae4dda1db6179deafb41fe2d3b16f574118bf1c3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c310t-b289ad1c052b31ddd5333e2eaae4dda1db6179deafb41fe2d3b16f574118bf1c3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9866014$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ikemoto, L C</creatorcontrib><title>Forced cesareans</title><title>Current opinion in obstetrics & gynecology</title><addtitle>Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol</addtitle><description>This review attempts primarily to provide guidance to physicians and others who may face the dilemma raised by a patient who refuses a recommended cesarean. This is, therefore, not a traditional literature review. The ethical-legal nature of the topic necessitates a different approach. Accordingly, this review briefly describes two recent cases in which courts have reversed orders to override a woman's refusal of consent, suggests different ways in which medical practice trends and emerging medical data may be implicated in forced cesarean cases, and then considers the implications of recent cases in the light of social-political factors.</description><subject>Cesarean Section</subject><subject>Ethics, Medical</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Informed Consent - legislation & jurisprudence</subject><subject>Los Angeles</subject><subject>Pregnancy</subject><subject>Treatment Refusal - legislation & jurisprudence</subject><subject>United States</subject><issn>1040-872X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1998</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNo9UE1LAzEQzUGptQr-AaEnb6szyW42OUqxKhS8KHgL-ZhAZdutSffgvze1a-cyzOO9ebzH2BzhHkG3D1AGWxAVaq2Ql6s6QPKMTRFqqFTLPy_YZc5fhcc1qAmbaCUlYD1lN8s-eQpzT9kmstt8xc6j7TJdj3vGPpZP74uXavX2_Lp4XFVeIOwrx5W2AT003AkMITRCCOJkLdUhWAxOYqsD2ehqjMSDcChj09aIykX0Ysbujn93qf8eKO_NZp09dZ3dUj9kIzUClkSFqI5En_qcE0WzS-uNTT8GwRwKMP8FmFMBf5As0tvRY3AbCifhmF78AlOTVtg</recordid><startdate>19981201</startdate><enddate>19981201</enddate><creator>Ikemoto, L C</creator><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19981201</creationdate><title>Forced cesareans</title><author>Ikemoto, L C</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c310t-b289ad1c052b31ddd5333e2eaae4dda1db6179deafb41fe2d3b16f574118bf1c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1998</creationdate><topic>Cesarean Section</topic><topic>Ethics, Medical</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Informed Consent - legislation & jurisprudence</topic><topic>Los Angeles</topic><topic>Pregnancy</topic><topic>Treatment Refusal - legislation & jurisprudence</topic><topic>United States</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ikemoto, L C</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Current opinion in obstetrics & gynecology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ikemoto, L C</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Forced cesareans</atitle><jtitle>Current opinion in obstetrics & gynecology</jtitle><addtitle>Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol</addtitle><date>1998-12-01</date><risdate>1998</risdate><volume>10</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>465</spage><epage>468</epage><pages>465-468</pages><issn>1040-872X</issn><abstract>This review attempts primarily to provide guidance to physicians and others who may face the dilemma raised by a patient who refuses a recommended cesarean. This is, therefore, not a traditional literature review. The ethical-legal nature of the topic necessitates a different approach. Accordingly, this review briefly describes two recent cases in which courts have reversed orders to override a woman's refusal of consent, suggests different ways in which medical practice trends and emerging medical data may be implicated in forced cesarean cases, and then considers the implications of recent cases in the light of social-political factors.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pmid>9866014</pmid><doi>10.1097/00001703-199812000-00006</doi><tpages>4</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1040-872X |
| ispartof | Current opinion in obstetrics & gynecology, 1998-12, Vol.10 (6), p.465-468 |
| issn | 1040-872X |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_69101199 |
| source | MEDLINE; Journals@Ovid Complete |
| subjects | Cesarean Section Ethics, Medical Female Humans Informed Consent - legislation & jurisprudence Los Angeles Pregnancy Treatment Refusal - legislation & jurisprudence United States |
| title | Forced cesareans |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-04T14%3A27%3A40IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Forced%20cesareans&rft.jtitle=Current%20opinion%20in%20obstetrics%20&%20gynecology&rft.au=Ikemoto,%20L%20C&rft.date=1998-12-01&rft.volume=10&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=465&rft.epage=468&rft.pages=465-468&rft.issn=1040-872X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097/00001703-199812000-00006&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E69101199%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=69101199&rft_id=info:pmid/9866014&rfr_iscdi=true |