Cheney Melissa
Oregon State University Department of Anthropology, 272 Waldo Hall, Corvallis, Oregon 97331 USA.
J Clin Ethics. 2015 Spring;26(1):36-9.
In this commentary, I respond to an ethical analysis of a case study, reported by Jankowski and Burcher, in which a woman gives birth to an infant with a known heart anomaly of unknown severity, at home, attended by a midwife. Jankowski and Burcher argue that the midwife who attended this family acted unethically because she knowingly operated outside of her scope of practice. While I agree that the authors' conclusions are well supported by the portion of the story they were able to gather, the fact that the midwife and mother declined to engage in the ethics consult that informs their piece means that critical segments of the narrative are left untold. Some important additional considerations emerge from these silences. I explore the implicit assumptions of the biotechnical embrace, the roles of the political economy of hope and the obstetric imaginary in driving prenatal testing, and institutional blame for the divisiveness of the home-hospital divide in the United States. The value of Jankowski and Burcher's case study lies in its ability to highlight the intersections and potential conflicts between the principles of beneficence, patients' autonomy, and professional ethics, and to begin to chart a course for us through them.
在这篇评论中,我回应了扬科夫斯基和伯彻对一个案例研究的伦理分析。该案例中,一名妇女在家中由一名助产士接生,产下一名患有已知心脏异常但严重程度未知的婴儿。扬科夫斯基和伯彻认为,照顾这个家庭的助产士行为不道德,因为她明知故犯地超出了自己的执业范围。虽然我同意作者的结论在他们所能收集到的故事部分中有充分的依据,但助产士和母亲拒绝参与为他们的文章提供信息的伦理咨询,这意味着故事的关键部分没有被讲述出来。这些沉默引发了一些重要的额外思考。我探讨了对生物技术的接受所隐含的假设、希望的政治经济学和产科想象在推动产前检测中的作用,以及美国家庭与医院分隔造成分裂的制度性责任。扬科夫斯基和伯彻的案例研究的价值在于,它能够突出行善原则、患者自主权和职业道德原则之间的交叉点和潜在冲突,并开始为我们指引一条穿越这些冲突的道路。