{"title":"Reversal of Roe v. Wade and implications of legal restrictions for neonatal care.","authors":"Christine E Bishop, Maya Manian","doi":"10.1097/MOP.0000000000001445","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>This review examines the implications of the 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision on neonatal care and explores how legal restrictions on abortion are influencing medical practices for neonates and the broader healthcare landscape for neonates.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>The Dobbs decision has led to increased uncertainty and challenges in both maternal and neonatal healthcare. Restrictive abortion laws are associated with higher infant mortality rates, increased health disparity, and increased care provider ethical dilemmas and moral distress due to legal uncertainty surrounding the care of infants. However, current changes in federal and state law regarding abortion do not change the previously established standard of care for neonates. Other federal legal statutes potentially addressing the care of neonates have existed for over 20 years and have had minimal effect on the practice of neonatology, because there is no record of federal enforcement actions or federal case law to clarify how the law should be interpreted.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>While restrictive abortion laws primarily affect women and pregnant people's health care, indirect effects on neonatal care are becoming more common. There are other laws and policies with greater potential to regulate care for infants at the federal and state level. Professional medical standards remain the guiding framework in neonatal care. Clinicians can mitigate legal concerns through knowledge and advocacy.</p>","PeriodicalId":10985,"journal":{"name":"Current opinion in pediatrics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current opinion in pediatrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MOP.0000000000001445","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose of review: This review examines the implications of the 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision on neonatal care and explores how legal restrictions on abortion are influencing medical practices for neonates and the broader healthcare landscape for neonates.
Recent findings: The Dobbs decision has led to increased uncertainty and challenges in both maternal and neonatal healthcare. Restrictive abortion laws are associated with higher infant mortality rates, increased health disparity, and increased care provider ethical dilemmas and moral distress due to legal uncertainty surrounding the care of infants. However, current changes in federal and state law regarding abortion do not change the previously established standard of care for neonates. Other federal legal statutes potentially addressing the care of neonates have existed for over 20 years and have had minimal effect on the practice of neonatology, because there is no record of federal enforcement actions or federal case law to clarify how the law should be interpreted.
Summary: While restrictive abortion laws primarily affect women and pregnant people's health care, indirect effects on neonatal care are becoming more common. There are other laws and policies with greater potential to regulate care for infants at the federal and state level. Professional medical standards remain the guiding framework in neonatal care. Clinicians can mitigate legal concerns through knowledge and advocacy.
期刊介绍:
Current Opinion in Pediatrics is a reader-friendly resource which allows the reader to keep up-to-date with the most important advances in the pediatric field. Each issue of Current Opinion in Pediatrics contains three main sections delivering a diverse and comprehensive cover of all key issues related to pediatrics; including genetics, therapeutics and toxicology, adolescent medicine, neonatology and perinatology, and orthopedics. Unique to Current Opinion in Pediatrics is the office pediatrics section which appears in every issue and covers popular topics such as fever, immunization and ADHD. Current Opinion in Pediatrics is an indispensable journal for the busy clinician, researcher or student.