Neumann P G, Valladares L
Health Care Law Newsl. 1991 Dec;6(12):3-7.
George Washington University Medical Center's Policy on decisionmaking by pregnant patients is being widely circulated by the ACLU; copies of the Policy can be obtained by calling the American Civil Liberties Union Reproductive Freedom Project. There is, of course, much disagreement over the details of the Policy; not everyone will agree with its underlying philosophy favoring maternal rights. Nevertheless, there does seem to be a consensus that wherever possible these conflicts should be resolved in accordance with previously adopted policies rather than by the courts on an ad hoc basis. Had the Policy been in place in 1987, the Carder case would probably not have been submitted to a judge in the first place, nor would Angela Carder have been forced to undergo a Caesarean section. All hospitals should consider adopting a maternal-fetal conflict policy, and those that do so should be aware of the George Washington University Medical Center Policy, whether or not they agree with its provisions. Whatever policy each hospital ultimately develops should be integrated with decisionmaking and informed consent policies already in place. The formulation and implementation of such a policy, reflecting the hospital's legal and ethical obligations to its pregnant patients, will go a long way towards preventing unnecessary resort to the courts.
美国公民自由联盟正在广泛传播乔治·华盛顿大学医学中心关于孕妇决策的政策；可致电美国公民自由联盟生殖自由项目获取该政策副本。当然，对于该政策的细节存在诸多分歧；并非所有人都认同其支持产妇权利的基本理念。然而，似乎存在一种共识，即只要有可能，这些冲突应根据先前通过的政策解决，而非由法院临时裁决。如果该政策在1987年就已存在，卡德案可能根本不会提交给法官，安吉拉·卡德也不会被迫接受剖腹产。所有医院都应考虑采用一项母婴冲突政策，而采用该政策的医院应了解乔治·华盛顿大学医学中心的政策，无论它们是否同意其条款。每家医院最终制定的任何政策都应与现有的决策和知情同意政策相结合。制定和实施这样一项反映医院对其孕妇患者的法律和道德义务的政策，将大大有助于避免不必要地诉诸法院。
