Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Interests and Neonates: There Is More to the Story than We Explicitly Acknowledge

  • Published:
Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Although there are many different moral arguments concerning the use of Best Interests in neonatal decision-making, there seems in practice a firm commitment to application of the concept. And yet, there is still little reflection given by practitioners about what employing a Best Interest determination means in infant care. The following lays out a comprehensive taxonomy of interest-sources in order to provide for more robust considerations of what constitutes best interests of/for neonates.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Beauchamp, T. and J. Childress. The Principles of Biomedical Ethics, 4th ed. Oxford University Press, 1996.

  • Buchanan, A. and D. Brock. Deciding for Others: The Ethics of Surrogate Decision Making. Oxford University Press, 1989.

  • Dewey, J. Democracy and Education. Macmillan Co., 1944 [1916].

  • Diekema D.S. (2004) Parental Refusals of Medical Treatments: The Harm Principle As Threshold for State Intervention. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics. 24:243–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engelhardt, H.T. “Ethical Issues in Aiding the Death of Young Children.” In Beneficent Euthanasia. Edited by M. Kohl. Prometheus Books, 1975.

  • Engelhardt, H.T. Introduction. In Euthanasia and the Newborn. Edited by R.C.␣McMillan, H.T. Engelhardt, and S.F. Spicker. (New York: Reidel, 1987).

  • Hester, D.M. Community As Healing: Pragmatist Ethics in Medical Encounters. Rowman & Littlefield, 2001.

  • James W. “The Moral Philosopher and the Moral Life.” In: The Writings of William James: A Comprehensive Edition. Edited by J.J. McDermott. 610–629. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1977

  • Kopelman L. (1997) The Best-interests Standard as Threshold, Ideal, and Standard of Reasonableness. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 22:271–289.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kopelman L. (2005) Rejecting the Baby Doe Rules and Defending a ‹Negative’ Analysis of the Best Interests Standard. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 30:331–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mead, G.H. Mind, Self, & Society from the Standpoint of a Social Behaviorist. Edited by C. M. Morris. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962 [1934].

  • Ross L.F. “Healthcare Decisionmaking by Children: Is It in Their Best Interest?” Hastings Center Report 27, no. 6 (1996): 41–45.

  • Ross, L.F. Children, Families, and Health Care Decision Making. Oxford University Press, 1998.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Medical Humanities, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, 4301 W. Markham St., #646, Little Rock, AR, 72205, USA

    D. Micah Hester

Authors
  1. D. Micah Hester
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to D. Micah Hester.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hester, D.M. Interests and Neonates: There Is More to the Story than We Explicitly Acknowledge. Theor Med Bioeth 28, 357–372 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11017-007-9048-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11017-007-9048-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation