Court ordered obstetric intervention: a commentary.
A case is presented where the Courts have authorised an obstetric intervention deemed necessary for the well-being of both mother and child. Although the case is one of maternal psychosis, there are legal and ethical concerns whenever court-ordered intervention is deemed necessary. Approaches to this difficult medical decision making problem in the form of utilitarian "burdens v benefit" ratio analysis or the recognised traditional ethical principles of beneficence, nonmaleficence, justice and acting in the patient's best interest are considered. The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists guidelines suggesting "that it is inappropriate ... to invoke judicial intervention to overrule an informed and competent woman's refusal of a proposed medical treatment, even though her refusal might place her life and that of her fetus at risk" are questioned.
D000328:Adult; D002585:Cesarean Section; D004992:Ethics, Medical; D005260:Female; D005555:Forensic Psychiatry; D006801:Humans; D033222:Judicial Role; D007751:Labor, Induced; D033261:Maternal-Fetal Relations; D016743:Mental Competency; D028642:Persons with Psychiatric Disorders; D009520:New Zealand; D028723:Personhood; D011247:Pregnancy; D011248:Pregnancy Complications; D037841:Pregnant People; D012563:Schizophrenia, Paranoid