Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T08:17:44.070Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 21 - Legal Commentary III

from Part III - SURGICAL PROCEDURES

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 May 2010

John Patrick O'Grady
Affiliation:
Tufts University, Massachusetts
Get access

Summary

Most surgical conditions that occur in the nonpregnant patient also occur in pregnancy. For a surgical problem that arises during pregnancy, the urgency of surgical treatment must be balanced against the risk that such treatment poses to the mother and the fetus. Current obstetric literature and legal case reports reveal that obstetric forceps and the vacuum extractor are coming back into the mainstream of obstetric practice. Cesarean delivery has been a major tool to assist the obstetrician in improving pregnancy outcome. Urologic injuries occurring during the course of pregnancy or more commonly during surgical or instrumental delivery, can result in serious and potentially life-threatening complications to both the mother and the unborn infant. Most urologic injuries from vaginal or abdominal surgical procedures on pregnant women involve some form of direct mechanical injury or compromise to the bladder or ureters.
Type
Chapter
Information
Operative Obstetrics , pp. 663 - 682
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2008

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.)

References

Coutts, MC: Maternal-fetal conflict: Legal and ethical issues. Scope Notes No.14. Washington, DC, National Reference Center for Bioethics Literature, 1990.Google Scholar
American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Bioethics: Fetal therapy: Ethical considerations. Pediatrics. 1988 Jun;81(6):898–9.
Office of Applied Studies: Results from the 2003 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: National findings (DHHS Publication No. SMA 04–3964, NSDUH Series H–25). Rockville, MD, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 2004.
Grella, CE: Women in residential drug treatment: Differences by program type and pregnancy. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 1999 May;10(2):216–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roe v. Wade, 410 U. S. 113 (1973).
Gallagher, J: Prenatal invasion and interventions: What's wrong with fetal rights?Harvard Women's Law Journal 10:9, 1987.
McFall v. Shrimp, 10 Pa. D. & C. Alleghany County Ct. (1978).
Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey 505 U. S. 833 (1992).
Blank RH: Maternal-fetal relationship. J Legal Med 14:73–92, 1993.
Jefferson v. Griffin Spalding County Hospital, 274 S. E.2d 457 (Ga. 1981).
Pemberton v. Tallahassee Memorial Regional Hospital 66 F.Supp. 2d 1247 Fl. 1999).
In Re A. C. 573 A.2d 1235 (1990).
In Re Brown 689 N. E.2d (Ill. App. 1997).
McKnight v. South Carolina, 124 S. Ct. 101 (2003).
Whitner v. State, 492 S. E.2d 777 (1997), cert denied, 523 U. S. 1145 (1998).
Ferguson v. City of Charleston 532 U. S. 67 (2001).
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecolo- gists: Maternal decision making, ethics and the law. Committee Opinion Number 321, November 2005. Washington, DC, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
Jonsen, A, Siegler, M, Winslade, W: Clinical Ethics, ed 3. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1992.Google Scholar
Redelmeier, DA, Rozin, P, Kahneman, D: Understanding patient decisions: Cognitive and emotional prospectives. JAMA 1993 Jul 7;270(1):72–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steinbock, B: Life Before Birth: The Moral and Legal Status of Embryos and Fetuses. Boston: Oxford University Press, 1992.Google Scholar
Barron, WM: The pregnant surgical patient: Medical evaluation and management. Ann Intern Med 101: 683, 1984.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
National Vital Statistics Report, Vol. 49. Hyattsville, MD, National Center for Health Statistics, 2001.
Andersen, B, Nielsen, T:Appendicitis in pregnancy: Diagnosis, management and complications. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1999 Oct;78(9):758–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adams, DH, Fine, C, Brooks, DC:High-resolution real-time ultrasonography: A new tool in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Am J Surg 1988 Jan;155 (1):93–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parungo, C, Brooks, DC:The pregnant surgical patient. ACS Surgery, WebMD, 2006.Google Scholar
Hill, LM, Johnson, CE, Lee, RA:Cholecystectomy in pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 1975 Sep;46(3):291–3.Google Scholar
Diehl, AK, Stern, MP, Ostrower, VS, Freidman, PC:Prevalence of clinical gallbladder disease in Mexican-American, Anglo, and Black women. South Med J 1980 Apr;73(4):438–41, 443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kern, F Jr.: Epidemiology and natural history of gallstones. Semin Liver Dis 1983 May;3(2):87–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trotman, BW, Soloway, RD:Pigment versus cholesterol cholelithiasis: Clinical and epidemiological aspects. Am J Dig Dis 1975 Aug;20(8):735–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pavlidis, NA: Coexistence of pregnancy and malignancy: Oncologist 2002;7(4):279–87.
Tarraza, H, Moore, R: Gynecologic causes of the acute abdomen and the acute abdomen in pregnancy. Surg Clin North Am 1997 Dec;77(6):1371–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shay, DC, Bhavani-Shankar, K, 31, S: Laparoscopic surgery during pregnancy. Anesthesiol Clin North America 2001 Mar;19(1):57–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Varner, MW: Neuropsychiatric sequelae of midforceps deliveries. Clin Perinatol 1983 Jun;10(2):455–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dennen, PC: Dennen's Forceps Deliveries, Third Edition. Philadelphia: FA Davis Company, 1989.Google Scholar
O'Grady, JP: Modern Instrumental Delivery. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins, 1988.Google Scholar
Laufe, , Berkus, MD: Assisted Vaginal Delivery: Obstetrical Forceps and Vacuum Extraction Techniques. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1992.Google Scholar
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecolo- gists: Obstetric forceps. Committee Opinion No. 71. Washington, DC: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, 1989.
American College of Obstetrics and Gynecologists: Operative vaginal delivery. Technical Bulletin No. 152. Washington, DC: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, 1991.
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG): Operative vaginal delivery. Practice Bulletin No 17, Jun 1, 2000. Washington (DC): American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG).
Healy, DL, Laufe, : Survey of obstetrical forceps training in North America in 1981. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1985 Jan 1;151(1):54–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecolo- gists: Surgery and patient choice. Committee Opinion No. 289. Washington, DC: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, 2003.
Glazener, CMA, Abdalla, M, Stroud, P, Naji, S, Templeton, A, Russell, IT: Postnatal maternal morbidity: Extent, causes, prevention and treatment. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1995 Apr;102(4):282–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Minkoff, H, Chervenak, FA: Elective primary cesarean delivery. N Engl J Med 2003 Mar 6;348(10):946–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sultan, AH, Stanton, SL: Preserving the pelvic floor and perineum during childbirth – elective caesarean section?Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1996 Aug;103 (8):731–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pritchard, JA, Baldwin, RM, Dickey, JC, Wiggins, KM: Red blood cell loss and changes in apparent blood volume during and following vaginal delivery, cesarean section, and cesarean section plus total abdominal hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1962;84:1271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hemminki, E, Merilainum, J: Long-term effects of cesarean sections: Ectopic pregnancies and placental problems. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996 May;174(5):1569–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greene, R, Gardeil, F, Turner, MJ: Long-term effects of cesarean sections. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1997 Jan; 176(1 Pt 1):254–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, JR: Putting elective cesarean into perspective. Obstet Gynecol 2002 Jun;99(6):967–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, SL, Koonings, PP, Phelan, JP: Placenta previa/ accreta and prior cesarean section. Obstet Gynecol 1985 Jul;66(1):89–92.Google Scholar
Schreiber v. Physicians Ins., 579 N. W.2d 730 (1998).
The Boston Globe, Meador v. Stahler and Gheridian, Wednesday, June 16, 1993.
Chervenak, FA, McCullough, LB: Neglected ethical dimensions of the professional liability crisis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004 May;190(5):1198–200. Review.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seats v. Lowery, 930 S. W. 2d 558 (1996).
Kimber, C, Spitz, L, Cuschieri, A: Current state of antenatal in utero surgical interventions. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 1997 Mar;76(2):F134–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, N: The line between clinical innovation and human experimentation, 32 Seton Hall Law Rev 2003;32(3):571–80.Google ScholarPubMed
Giesen, D: Civil liability of physicians for new methods of treatment and experimentation: A comparative examination. Med Law Rev 1995 Spring; 3(1):22–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morin, K: The standard of disclosure in human subject experimentation, 19 J. Legal Med 157 (1998).Google Scholar
Adams v. Arthur, 969 S. W.2d 598 (1998).
Johnson v. Arthur, 986 S. W.2d 874 (1999).

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×