• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

治疗还是不治疗:残疾新生儿的争议

To treat or not to treat: the controversy of handicapped newborns.

作者信息

Carr M W

出版信息

Crit Care Nurse. 1989 Sep;9(8):73-8.

PMID:2531064
Abstract

When dealing with the prospects of treating, not treating, or delaying treatment for handicapped newborns, there is no room for error. Since that is an impossible premise, one must make the best possible treatment plan for the newborn. The parents and members of the health care team should be included in the decision making. Those involved must also remember that no decisions are final; if the infant's physical condition changes, the treatment plan may be reevaluated. Any errors must be made by promoting the best interests of the infant in question, by keeping the infant alive longer than necessary rather than providing a premature death. Never, under any circumstances, should an infant be starved, dehydrated, or outright killed; to do so is to violate the rights of the infant. The infant's rights to life without constant pain are also violated by the senseless prolongation of his life and the promotion of wrongful life through the excessive use of modern technology.

摘要

在处理残疾新生儿的治疗、不治疗或延迟治疗的前景时,容不得半点差错。由于这是一个不可能实现的前提,因此必须为新生儿制定尽可能最佳的治疗方案。父母和医疗团队成员应参与决策。相关人员还必须记住,没有任何决定是最终的;如果婴儿的身体状况发生变化,治疗方案可能会被重新评估。任何错误都必须是出于促进相关婴儿的最大利益,是让婴儿存活的时间超过必要而非导致过早死亡。在任何情况下,都绝不应让婴儿挨饿、脱水或直接杀害;这样做就是侵犯婴儿的权利。过度使用现代技术导致婴儿生命无意义地延长以及造成不当生命,这也侵犯了婴儿享有无持续痛苦生活的权利。

相似文献

1
To treat or not to treat: the controversy of handicapped newborns.治疗还是不治疗:残疾新生儿的争议
Crit Care Nurse. 1989 Sep;9(8):73-8.
2
Baby doe redux? The Department of Health and Human Services and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002: a cautionary note on normative neonatal practice.“婴儿多伊”事件重演?美国卫生与公众服务部及2002年《出生时存活婴儿保护法》:关于规范新生儿医疗行为的警示
Pediatrics. 2005 Oct;116(4):e576-85. doi: 10.1542/peds.2005-1590.
3
[Ethical observations concerning the limitations of medical duty to treat in severely handicapped neonates].
Schweiz Rundsch Med Prax. 1994 May 3;83(18):556-8.
4
International comparison of care for very low birth weight infants: parents' perceptions of counseling and decision-making.极低出生体重儿护理的国际比较:父母对咨询与决策的看法
Pediatrics. 2005 Aug;116(2):e263-71. doi: 10.1542/peds.2004-2274.
5
End-of-life decisions in Dutch neonatal intensive care units.荷兰新生儿重症监护病房中的临终决策。
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2009 Oct;163(10):895-901. doi: 10.1001/archpediatrics.2009.166.
6
The ballad of Baby Doe: parental discretion or medical neglect?
Prim Care. 1986 Jun;13(2):271-83.
7
[Limitation of intensive care and infant death during the postnatal period].
J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 2002 Feb;31(1 Suppl):2S94-7.
8
Infants of borderline viability: ethical and clinical considerations.临界生存能力的婴儿:伦理与临床考量
Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2008 Feb;13(1):8-15. doi: 10.1016/j.siny.2007.09.007. Epub 2007 Nov 13.
9
Debate: severely handicapped newborns. For sometimes letting--and helping--die.辩论:重度残疾新生儿。关于有时让其死亡并给予帮助。
Law Med Health Care. 1986 Sep;14(3-4):149-54.
10
The neonatologist's duty to patient and parents.新生儿科医生对患者及家长的职责。
Hastings Cent Rep. 1984 Aug;14(4):10-6.