Abstract
AbstractEvidence shows that during birth women frequently experience unconsented care, coercion, and a loss of autonomy. For many countries, this contradicts both the law and medical ethics guidelines, which emphasize that competent and fully informed women’s autonomy must always be respected. To better understand this discordance, we empirically describe perinatal maternity care providers’ and women’s moral deliberation surrounding coercive measures during birth. Data were obtained from 1-on-1 interviews with providers (N = 15) and women (N = 14), and a survey of women (N = 118). Analyses focused on an in-depth exploration of responses to a question on the permissibility of coercion in birth whose wording was borrowed from a Swiss medical-ethical guideline. Reasons for and against a principle permissibility of coercive measures in birth were grouped into clusters of reasons to build a coherent explanatory framework. Factors considered morally relevant when deliberating on coercion included women’s decisional capacity, beneficence/non-maleficence, authority through knowledge on the part of providers, flaws of the medical system, or the imperative to protect the most vulnerable. Also, we identified various misconceptions, such as the conviction that a pathological birth can justify coercion or that fetal rights can justifiably infringe on women’s autonomy. Information and education on the issue of coercion in birth are urgently needed to enable women to fully exercise their reproductive autonomy, to prevent long-term adverse health outcomes of women and children, and to reconcile the medical vigilance which has lead to a reduction of perinatal morbidity and mortality with women’s enfranchisement in their own care.
Funder
Research Fund Junior Researchers, University of Basel
University of Basel
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference52 articles.
1. Abrams, J. R. (2017). The illusion of autonomy in women’s medical decision-making. Florida State University Law Review, 42, 17.
2. Arras, J. D. (2007). The way we reason now: reflective equilibrium in bioethics. In B. Steinbock (Ed.), The oxford handbook of bioethics. Oxford University Press.
3. Bohren, M. A., et al. (2015). The mistreatment of women during childbirth in health facilities globally: A mixed-methods systematic review. PLoS Medicine, 12(6), e1001847. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001847
4. Bohren, M. A., et al. (2019). How women are treated during facility-based childbirth in four countries: A cross-sectional study with labour observations and community-based surveys. The Lancet, 394(10210), 1750–1763. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(19)31992-0
5. Büchler, A. (2017). Reproduktive Autonomie und Selbstbestimmung—Dimensionen. Helbing Lichtenhahn Verlag.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献