‘Baby Doe’ Rules: There Are Alternatives

Dana E Johnson, Theodore R. Thompson, Mila Aroskar, Ronald E. Cranford

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

9 Scopus citations

Abstract

The federal government's “Baby Doe” rule has elicited a strong negative response; however, a more constructive option for concerned health care providers would be to formulate reasonable alternatives to such rules. Such an alternative infant advocacy process has been developed within our community. This multistep process, which attempts to optimize individual patient care and provide public accountability, lists six ethical propositions that ensure that decisions are made in the best interests of the infant; five decision-making principles that define physician and parent obligations and ensure that decisions are made only after careful thought; and guidelines for committee review that ensure that decisions are reviewed in a manner that recognizes the rights of the child and the parents as well as society's interest in ensuring that the best decisions are made in matters of life and death.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)523-529
Number of pages7
JournalAmerican Journal of Diseases of Children
Volume138
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 1984

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of '‘Baby Doe’ Rules: There Are Alternatives'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this