Wendland Claire L
Department of Anthropology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, USA.
J Clin Ethics. 2013 Fall;24(3):253-65.
Interest in home birth appears to be growing among American women, and most obstetricians can expect to encounter patients who are considering home birth. In 2011, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) issued an opinion statement intended to guide obstetricians in responding to such patients. In this article, I examine the ACOG statement in light of the historical and contemporary clinical realities surrounding home birth in the United States, an examination guided in part by my own experiences as an obstetrician in home-birth-friendly and home-birth-unfriendly medical milieus. Comparison with other guidelines indicates that ACOG treats home birth as an ethical exception: comparable evidence leads to strikingly different recommendations in the case of home birth and the case of trial of labor following a prior cesarean; and ACOG treats other controversial issues that involve similar ethical questions quite differently. By casting the provision of information as not just the primary but the sole ethical responsibility of the obstetrician, ACOG statement obviates obstetricians' responsibilities to provide appropriate clinical care and to make the safest possible clinical environment for those mothers who choose home birth and for their newborns. What, on its face, seems to be a statement of respect for women's autonomy, implicitly authorizes behaviors that unethically restrain truly autonomous choices. Obstetricians need not attend home births, I argue. Our ethical duties do, however, oblige us (1) to refer clients to skilled clinicians who will attend home birth, (2) to continue respectful antenatal care for those women choosing home birth, (3) to provide appropriate consultation to home birth attendants, and (4) to ensure that transfers of care are smooth and nonpunitive.
美国女性对家庭分娩的兴趣似乎在增加,大多数产科医生可能会遇到考虑家庭分娩的患者。2011年,美国妇产科医师学会(ACOG)发表了一份意见声明,旨在指导产科医生应对此类患者。在本文中,我根据美国围绕家庭分娩的历史和当代临床现实来审视ACOG的声明,这种审视部分受我自己在支持家庭分娩和不支持家庭分娩的医疗环境中作为产科医生的经历所引导。与其他指南的比较表明,ACOG将家庭分娩视为一种道德例外:类似的证据在家庭分娩和既往剖宫产术后试产的情况下导致了截然不同的建议;而且ACOG对其他涉及类似伦理问题的争议性问题的处理方式也大不相同。ACOG的声明将提供信息不仅视为产科医生的主要道德责任,而且视为唯一的道德责任,从而免除了产科医生为选择家庭分娩的母亲及其新生儿提供适当临床护理并营造尽可能安全的临床环境的责任。从表面上看似乎是尊重女性自主权的声明,却暗中授权了不道德地限制真正自主选择的行为。我认为,产科医生不必参与家庭分娩。然而,我们的道德义务确实要求我们:(1)将客户转介给会参与家庭分娩的熟练临床医生;(2)继续为选择家庭分娩的女性提供尊重的产前护理;(3)向家庭分娩护理人员提供适当的咨询;(4)确保护理交接顺利且无惩罚性。