Before the results were returned, Gina arrived at the labor and delivery unit with a tender abdomen, purulent discharge from the cervix, and high fever. She appeared to have an acute intrauterine infection from the amniocentesis procedure. Antibiotics were started, but it soon became clear that the woman was becoming septic; the obstetrician on call recommended rapid delivery of the fetus.
Gina and her husband again clearly stated that they wanted no resuscitation performed on the infant after delivery. The couple and the physicians agreed that, given the probability of a severely anomalous infant, the plan would be to provide only comfort care measures.
Gina’s labor was induced
and she delivered a liveborn female infant, surprisingly robust. The infant had
a strong cry, kicked vigorously, and was much larger than anticipated. The
neonatologists examining the infant found themselves reconsidering their
decision to withhold resuscitation. Suddenly the seemingly certain prenatal
diagnosis of Down syndrome appeared implausible, given the appearance of a
strong infant without apparent anomalies. The NICU team realized that, under
any other circumstance, resuscitation measures would be well under way; they
became uneasy as they watched the premature infant's forceful kicking and
energetic cries. Within minutes to hours the female infant's lungs would tire
and she would die without respiratory support.
The physicians announced to the
parents their decision to reverse their previous plan to withhold care based on
the healthy appearance of the neonate. The neonatologist described the
resuscitation measures they planned to begin. The parents were infuriated.
"We had an agreement," the father retorted. "My wife and I made
it very clear to you that we cannot manage an impaired child. This is our
decision to make—we're the parents, and it is your duty to respect our
wishes."
*http://virtualmentor.ama-assn.org/2008/10/ccas1-0810.html
*http://virtualmentor.ama-assn.org/2008/10/ccas1-0810.html
No comments:
Post a Comment