The Ethics of Consent for Fetal Therapy

doi:10.1017/9781108564434.008

Chapter 7 - The Ethics of Consent for Fetal Therapy

from Section 1: - General Principles

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 21 October 2019

Wybo J. Dondorp and

Edited by

Anthony Johnson and

Mark D. Kilby: Affiliation:
University of Birmingham
Anthony Johnson: Affiliation:
University of Texas Medical School at Houston
Dick Oepkes: Affiliation:
Leids Universitair Medisch Centrum

Book contents

Get access

Summary

In this chapter, we will discuss the ethics of consent for fetal therapy. The latter term refers to a very broad field, ranging from open surgery to pharmacotherapy, from experimental procedures to accepted treatment, and from interventions aimed at saving fetuses from in utero or perinatal death to treatments with a rationale of improving long-term health outcomes. Because the fetus can only be treated via the body of the pregnant woman, fetal therapy is always a form of ‘maternal-fetal medicine’ and cannot be performed without her informed consent (or that of her representative). However, what makes informed consent for fetal therapy special is that, unlike in other medical contexts, the consenting (or non-consenting) person not only decides for herself, but also for the fetus who may or may not survive and/or for the future child who may or may not benefit. As a consequence, consent for fetal therapy is inevitably asked and given in the context of ideas about the responsibility of the pregnant woman as an expectant mother, a responsibility that, rightly or wrongly, is either assumed by her from within or ascribed to her from without.

Type: Chapter
Information: Fetal Therapy
Scientific Basis and Critical Appraisal of Clinical Benefits
, pp. 69 - 76

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108564434.008 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Manson, NC, O’Neill, O. Rethinking Informed Consent in Bioethics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2007.CrossRef Google Scholar

Faden, RR, Beauchamp, TL. A History and Theory of Informed Consent. New York: Oxford University Press, 1986.Google Scholar

Elwyn, GA, Durand, MA, Song, J, Aarts, J, Barr, PJ, Berger, Z, et al. A three-talk model for shared-decision making: multistage consultation process. BMJ. 2017; 359: j4891.Google Scholar

Sandman, L, Munthe, C. Shared decision making, paternalism and patient choice. Health Care Anal. 2010; 18: 60–84.Google Scholar

Emanuel, EJ, Emanuel, LL. Four models of the physician-patient relationship. JAMA. 1992; 267: 2221–6.Google Scholar

Sheppard, MK. Vulnerability, therapeutic misconception and informed consent: is there a need for special treatment of pregnant women in fetus-regarding clinical trials? J Med Ethics. 2016; 42: 127–31.CrossRef Google Scholar

Smajdor, A. Ethical challenges in fetal surgery. J Med Ethics. 2011; 37: 88–91.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Blizzard, D. A trying experience: fetoscopy and maternal decision making. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2005; 48: 562–73.Google Scholar

Clarke, A. Treatments and trials for the fetal patient: imposing the burdens of enthusiasm? In Schmitz, D, Clarke, A, Dondorp, W, eds., The Fetus as a Patient: A Contested Concept and Its Normative Implications. London: Routledge, 2018. p. 117–132.CrossRef Google Scholar

Lidz, CW, Appelbaum, PS. The therapeutic misconception: problems and solutions. Med Care. 2002; 40: V55–63.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Horng, S, Grady, C. Misunderstanding in clinical research: distinguishing therapeutic misconception, therapeutic misestimation, and therapeutic optimism. IRB. 2003; 25: 11–16.Google Scholar

Helmreich, RJ, Hundley, V, Norman, A, Ighedosa, A, Chow, E. Research in pregnant women: the challenges of informed consent. Nurs Womens Health. 2007; 11: 576–85.Google Scholar

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee on Ethics, American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Bioethics. Maternal-fetal intervention and fetal care centers. Pediatrics. 2011; 128: e473–8.Google Scholar

Lyerly, AD, Little, MO, Faden, RR. A critique of the ‘fetus as patient’. Am J Bioeth. 2008; 8: 42–4; discussion W4–6.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Casper, MJ. The Making of the Unborn Patient. A Social Anatomy of Fetal Surgery. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1998.Google Scholar

Dondorp, W, De Wert, G. Ethical issues in maternal-fetal medicine. In Rodeck, CH, Whittle, MJ, eds., Fetal Medicine: Basic Science and Clinical Practice, 3rd Edition. London: Elsevier, 2019, p. 139–148.Google Scholar

McCullough, LB, Chervenak, FA. Ethics in Obstetrics and Gynecology. New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994.Google Scholar

Callahan, JC, Knight, JW. Women, fetuses, medicine, and the law. In Bequaert Holmes, H, Purdy, L, eds., Feminist Perspectives in Medical Ethics. Bloomington & Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1992, pp. 224–239.Google Scholar

Murray, TH. Moral obligations to the not-yet born: the fetus as patient. Clin Perinatol. 1987; 14: 329–43.Google Scholar

Savulescu, J. Future people, involuntary medical treatment in pregnancy and the duty of easy rescue. Utilitas. 2007; 19: 1–20.Google Scholar

Care for the Unborn Child. Ethical and Legal Aspects of Fetal Therapy. The Hague: Health Council of the Netherlands, 2009.Google Scholar

Reitsma, AM, Moreno, JD. Ethical regulations for innovative surgery: the last frontier? J Am Coll Surg. 2002; 194: 792–801.Google Scholar

Antiel, RM, Flake, AW. Responsible surgical innovation and research in maternal-fetal surgery. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2017; 22: 423–7.Google Scholar

De Koning, TJ, Klomp, LW, Van Oppen, AC, Beemer, FA, Dorland, L, van den Berg, I, Berger, R. Prenatal and early postnatal treatment in 3-phosphoglycerate-dehydrogenase deficiency. Lancet. 2004; 364: 2221–2.Google Scholar

Liley, AW. The development of the idea of fetal transfusion. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1971; 111: 302–4.Google Scholar

Harrison, MR. The University of California at San Francisco Fetal Treatment Center: a personal perspective. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2004; 19: 513–24.Google Scholar

Lyerly, AD, Mahowald, MB. Maternal-fetal surgery: the fallacy of abstraction and the problem of equipoise. Health Care Anal. 2001; 9: 151–65.Google Scholar

Adzick, NS, Thom, EA, Spong, CY, Brock, JW 3rd, Burrows, PK, Johnson, MP, et al. A randomized trial of prenatal versus postnatal repair of myelomeningocele. N Engl J Med. 2011; 364: 993–1004.Google Scholar

Rodrigues, HCML, Deprest, J, Van den Berg, PP. When referring physicians and researchers disagree on equipoise: the TOTAL trial experience. Prenatal Diag. 2011; 31: 589–94.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Verweij, EJ. Ethics of involving pregnant women in fetal therapy trials. In Schmitz, D, Clarke, A, Dondorp, W, eds., The Fetus as a Patient: A Contested Concept and its Normative Implications. London: Routledge, 2018, p. 133–43.Google Scholar

Deprest, J, Toelen, J, Debyser, Z, Rodrigues, C, Devlieger, R, De Catte, L, Lewi, L, Van Mieghem, T, Naulaers, G, Vandevelde, M, Claus, F, Dierickx, K. The fetal patient – ethical aspects of fetal therapy. Facts Views Vis Obgyn. 2011; 3: 221–7.Google Scholar

Westgren, M, Götherström, C. Stem cell transplantation before birth – a realistic option for treatment of osteogenesis imperfecta? Prenatal Diag. 2015; 35: 827–32.Google Scholar

Götherström, C, Hermerén, G, Johansson, M, Sahlin, N-E, Westgren, M. Stem cells and fetal therapy: is it a reality? Obstet Gynaecol Reprod Med. 2017; 27: 166–7.Google Scholar

Strong, C. Abortion decisions as inclusion and exclusion criteria in research involving pregnant women and fetuses. J Med Ethics. 2012; 38: 43–7.Google Scholar

Lindenburg, IT, Van Kamp, IL, Oepkes, D. Intrauterine blood transfusion: current indications and associated risks. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2014; 36: 263–71.Google Scholar

Grethel, EJ, Wagner, AJ, Clifton, MS, Cortes, RA, Farmer, DL, Harrison, MR, Nobuhara, KK, Lee, H. Fetal intervention for mass lesions and hydrops improves outcome: a 15-year experience. J Pediatr Surg. 2007; 42: 117–23.CrossRef Google Scholar

Johnson, A. Diagnosis and Management of Twin-Twin Transfusion Syndrome. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2015; 58: 611–31.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Gebb, J, Dar, P, Rosner, M, Evans, MI. Long-term neurologic outcomes after common fetal interventions. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015; 212: e1–9.Google Scholar

Antiel, RM. Ethical challenges in the new world of maternal-fetal surgery. Semin Perinatol. 2016; 40: 227–33.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Committee on Ethics. Committee Opinion No. 664: refusal of medically recommended treatment during pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol. 2016; 127: e175–82.Google Scholar

Critical Care Decisions in Fetal and Neonatal Medicine: Ethical Issues. London: Nuffield Council on Bioethics, 2006, p. 276.Google Scholar

Bianchi, DW. From prenatal genomic diagnosis to fetal personalized medicine: progress and challenges. Nat Med. 2012; 18: 1041–51.Google Scholar

Guedj, F, Bianchi, DW, Delabar, JM. Prenatal treatment of Down syndrome: a reality? Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2014; 26: 92–103.Google Scholar

De Wert, G, Dondorp, W, Bianchi, DW. Fetal therapy for Down syndrome: an ethical exploration. Prenatal Diag. 2017; 37: 1–7.Google Scholar