title: When agreeing with the patient is not enough: a schizophrenic woman requests pregnancy termination.
abstract: In this article, we discuss the ethical dilemma health care providers faced when Rebecca, a pregnant schizophrenic patient who lacked decision-making capacity, inconsistently requested elective pregnancy termination. When a patient's decision-making capacity is severely impaired, how does the physician balance obligations to protect the patient from harm (beneficence) while also respecting her reproductive preferences and decisions (respect for autonomy)? Rebecca suffers from polysubstance abuse and paranoid schizophrenia characterized by disorganized thought and speech, auditory hallucinations, and delusional ideas. She arrived 14+ weeks pregnant and unaccompanied at an obstetric clinic requesting an abortion. This is her second and final request. On all prior and subsequent occasions, she was either ambivalent or said she wanted to continue the pregnancy. After the consulting psychiatrist determined that she lacked decision-making capacity, steps were taken to address ethical and clinical issues. The steps included treating her schizophrenia to see if she could regain decision-making capacity; identifying a surrogate and using a shared decision-making model; and devising strategies to protect Rebecca and her fetus without resorting to excessive paternalism. Rebecca continued her pregnancy. Due to poor adherence to medical regimen and inadequate social support, Rebecca's schizophrenia was poorly controlled and she continued to use drugs during the pregnancy. She delivered a term baby who was soon removed from her custody. Despite some people's desire to protect Rebecca by complying with her request for abortion, we conclude that to do so would be ethically unjustified. To treat a decisionally impaired patient's requests for abortion as autonomous is disrespectful of the vulnerable patient because such paternalism fails to respect the patient's liberty and the surrogate's authority.
authors.affiliation: Department of Medical History and Ethics, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA 98195-7120, USA. dudzin@u.washington.edu
authors.forename: Denise M
authors.initials: DM
authors.lastname: Dudzinski
authors.forename: Mark
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Sullivan
mesh_terms: D000023:Abortion Applicants / Q000523:psychology*; D000028:Abortion, Induced / Q000941:ethics*; D000328:Adult; D002655:Child Custody / Q000941:ethics; D015897:Comorbidity; D003661:Decision Support Techniques; D004992:Ethics, Medical; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007231:Infant, Newborn; D007872:Legal Guardians / Q000523:psychology; D016743:Mental Competency / Q000523:psychology*; D026706:Paternalism / Q000941:ethics; D026684:Personal Autonomy; D011247:Pregnancy; D012017:Referral and Consultation / Q000941:ethics; D012563:Schizophrenia, Paranoid / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000523:psychology; D019966:Substance-Related Disorders / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000523:psychology