medigraphic.com
ISSN 0035-0052 (Print)

2004, Number 5

<< Back Next >>

Rev Mex Pediatr 2004; 71 (5)

Bioethics in medical decisions take in hospitalized children

Muñoz ZG, Rivera TJA, Rojas RNE

Language: Spanish
References: 18
Page: 243-247
PDF size: 93.06 Kb.


ABSTRACT

The medical intervention in order to rescue children from death, which usually died time ago, demand today that the pediatricians and the relatives of the children ask themselves about moral questions, in regard to decisions that they would taken. Even the society need to analyze the ethical implications of these decisions due to the possibility of problems for the family and the life quality of the children related to the life extending of them, particularly in the case of neonates and infants. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) it has been pronounced in supports individualized decisions making about life-sustaining medical treatment for all children regardless of age.


REFERENCES

  1. Carter BS. Pediatric and bioethics. J Pediatr 2001; 13: 144-50.

  2. Beauchamp T, McCullough. La responsabilidad ética del médico. Cuadernos de bioética 2000; 14: 97-111.

  3. Engelhardt HT. Fundamentos de la bioética pediátrica. Cuadernos de bioética 1999; 6: 9-10.

  4. AAP Committee on Bioethics: Ethics and the care of critically ill infants and children. American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on bioethics. Pediatrics 1996; 98: 1149-52.

  5. AAP Committee on Fetus and Newborn, ACOG Committee on Obstetrics: Perinatal care at the threshold of viability. American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Fetus and Newborn. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee on Obstetric Practice. Pediatrics 1995; 95: 974-6.

  6. Anderson B, Hall B. Parents’ perceptions of decision making for children. J Law Med Ethics 1995; 23: 15-9.

  7. Doroshow RW, Hodgman JE, Pomerance JJ. Treatment decisions for newborns at the threshold of viability: an ethical dilemma. J Perinatol 2000; 20: 379-83.

  8. Singh M. Ethical and social issues in the care of the newborn. Indian J Pediatr 2003; 70: 417-20.

  9. Comisión Nacional de Arbitraje Médico (CONAMED). Preguntas y Respuestas. Cuadernos de Divulgación. 1998; 1: 1-31.

  10. American Academy of Pediatrics. Infant Bioethics Task Force and Consultants. Guidelines for infant bioethics committees. Pediatrics 1994; 92: 806-9.

  11. Moreno JD. Institutional ethics committees: proceed with caution. Md Law Rev 1998; 50: 895.

  12. Povar GJ. Evaluating ethics committees: what do we mean by success? Md Law Rev 1999; 58: 904.

  13. Hoffman DE. Regulating ethics committees in health care institutions: Is it time? Md Law Rev 1997; 47: 746.

  14. Mears BJ. Adherence to advance directives. AAP Grand Rounds 2004; 11: 21-2.

  15. Pentz RD. Expanding into organizational ethics: the experience of one clinical ethics committee. HEC Forum 1998; 10: 213-21.

  16. West MB, Gibson JM. Facilitating medical ethics case review: what ethics committees can leam from mediation and facilitation techniques. Camb Q Healthc Ethics 1992; 1: 63-74.

  17. Dubler NN, Marcus LJ. Mediating bioethical disputes New York, NY. United Hospital Fund 1999; 7: 51-2.

  18. Agich GJ. Authority in ethics consultation. J Law Med Ethics 1995; 23: 73-83.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com