Abstract
Identifying ethically allowable options for infants with trisomy 18 has become more challenging as medical standards of practice shift, based on emerging scientific data and changing societal perceptions of disability. Lack of a stable professional standard of practice ought not prevent ethicists from facilitating a consensus; rather, these "unsettled cases" require an individualized, narrative approach that allows the values of the family and the particularities of each case to provide the necessary additional moral grounding.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 338-344 |
| Number of pages | 7 |
| Journal | Journal of Clinical Ethics |
| Volume | 22 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| State | Published - Dec 1 2011 |
Fingerprint
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Medicine(all)
Cite this
}
Confronting ambiguity : Identifying options for infants with trisomy 18. / Derrington, Sabrina F.; Dworetz, April R.
In: Journal of Clinical Ethics, Vol. 22, No. 4, 01.12.2011, p. 338-344.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
TY - JOUR
T1 - Confronting ambiguity
T2 - Identifying options for infants with trisomy 18
AU - Derrington, Sabrina F.
AU - Dworetz, April R.
PY - 2011/12/1
Y1 - 2011/12/1
N2 - Identifying ethically allowable options for infants with trisomy 18 has become more challenging as medical standards of practice shift, based on emerging scientific data and changing societal perceptions of disability. Lack of a stable professional standard of practice ought not prevent ethicists from facilitating a consensus; rather, these "unsettled cases" require an individualized, narrative approach that allows the values of the family and the particularities of each case to provide the necessary additional moral grounding.
AB - Identifying ethically allowable options for infants with trisomy 18 has become more challenging as medical standards of practice shift, based on emerging scientific data and changing societal perceptions of disability. Lack of a stable professional standard of practice ought not prevent ethicists from facilitating a consensus; rather, these "unsettled cases" require an individualized, narrative approach that allows the values of the family and the particularities of each case to provide the necessary additional moral grounding.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84855919520&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84855919520&partnerID=8YFLogxK
M3 - Article
VL - 22
SP - 338
EP - 344
JO - Journal of Clinical Ethics
JF - Journal of Clinical Ethics
SN - 1046-7890
IS - 4
ER -