You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Clinical ethics
Surrogate decision making in crisis
  1. Dominic Wilkinson1,2,
  2. Thillagavathie Pillay3,4
  1. 1 Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
  2. 2 Newborn Care Unit, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK
  3. 3 Neonatal Unit, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester, UK
  4. 4 Academic Institute of Medicine, University of Wolverhampton Faculty of Science and Engineering, Wolverhampton, UK
  1. Correspondence to Professor Dominic Wilkinson, Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK; dominic.wilkinson{at}philosophy.ox.ac.uk

Abstract

Care of the critically ill newborn includes support for the birth mother/parents with regular updates around the clinical condition of the baby, and involvement in discussions around complex decision-making issues . Discussions around continuation or discontinuation of life-sustaining are challenging even in the most straightforward of cases, but what happens when the birth mother is critically unwell? Such cases can lead to uncertainty around who should assume the parental role for these difficult discussions . In this round table discussion, we explore the ethical, moral and legal uncertainties raised by coincident severe maternal and neonatal illness in the context of surrogacy.

  • decision-making
  • clinical ethics
  • neonatology
  • reproductive medicine

Data availability statement

There are no data in this work.

https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2020-107181

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Data availability statement

    There are no data in this work.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Twitter @Neonatalethics, @_tpillay

    • Contributors DW prepared the fictitious case, TP prepared the abstract. This case submission was based on discussions between TP and DW.

    • Funding DW was supported for this work by a grant from the Wellcome Trust 203132/Z/16/Z.

    • Disclaimer The funder had no role in the preparation of this manuscript or the decision to submit for publication.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

    • Author note This is a hypothetical composite case, containing elements of different real cases.

    Linked Articles