Article Text
Abstract
Unconsented episiotomies and other procedures during labour are commonly reported by women in several countries, and often highlighted in birth activism. Yet, forced caesarean sections aside, the ethics of consent during labour has received little attention. Focusing on episiotomies, this paper addresses whether and how consent in labour should be obtained. We briefly review the rationale for informed consent, distinguishing its intrinsic and instrumental relevance for respecting autonomy. We also emphasise two non-explicit ways of giving consent: implied and opt-out consent. We then discuss challenges and opportunities for obtaining consent in labour and birth, given its unique position in medicine.
We argue that consent for procedures in labour is always necessary, but this consent does not always have to be fully informed or explicit. We recommend an individualised approach where the antenatal period is used to exchange information and explore values and preferences with respect to the relevant procedures. Explicit consent should always be sought at the point of intervening, unless women antenatally insist otherwise. We caution against implied consent. However, if a woman does not give a conclusive response during labour and the stakes are high, care providers can move to clearly communicated opt-out consent. Our discussion is focused on episiotomies, but also provides a useful starting point for addressing the ethics of consent for other procedures during labour, as well as general time-critical medical procedures.
- Ethics
- Informed Consent
- Quality of Health Care
- Personal Autonomy
- Ethics- Medical
Data availability statement
Data sharing not applicable as no datasets generated and/or analysed for this study.
This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Data availability statement
Data sharing not applicable as no datasets generated and/or analysed for this study.
Footnotes
Twitter @maritvanderpijl
Contributors All authors equally contributed to setting up the aim of the paper, the outline of the paper and the arguments raised in the paper. MvdP and EK wrote the manuscript, with the support of all other authors (CV, MH and AdJ). All authors have contributed to and approved the original and revised manuscript. EK is the guarantor of the study.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Linked Articles
- Commentary
- Commentary
- Commentary
- Commentary
- Commentary
- Commentary
- Commentary
- Commentary
Other content recommended for you
- Understanding the perspectives and values of midwives, obstetricians and obstetric registrars regarding episiotomy: qualitative interview study
- Consent and episiotomies: do not let the perfect be the enemy of the good
- Knowledge, attitude and experience of episiotomy practice among obstetricians and midwives: a cross-sectional study from China
- Episiotomy practice in six Palestinian hospitals: a population-based cohort study among singleton vaginal births
- Midline episiotomy and anal incontinence: retrospective cohort study
- Consent and refusal of procedures during labour and birth: a survey among 11 418 women in the Netherlands
- Changing associations of episiotomy and anal sphincter injury across risk strata: results of a population-based register study in Finland 2004–2011
- Extending the ethics of episiotomy to vaginal examination: no place for opt-out consent
- Does gentle assisted pushing or giving birth in the upright position reduce the duration of the second stage of labour? A three-arm, open-label, randomised controlled trial in South Africa
- Confidentiality and the duties of care