“小母鹿”规则歧视婴儿吗?

Pediatrician Pub Date : 1990-01-01

G E Jones

{"title":"“小母鹿”规则歧视婴儿吗?","authors":"G E Jones","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This essay consists of a critical examination of the 'Baby Doe' rules with respect to their proscription of references to quality of life considerations as a basis for treatment decisions. It is argued that the rules cannot and should not obviate references to the infant's quality of life. Further, it is argued that there are not sufficient differences between infants and adult incompetent patients to justify the use of quality of life assessments with regard to the latter and not the former.","PeriodicalId":77588,"journal":{"name":"Pediatrician","volume":"17 2","pages":"87-91"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1990-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Do the 'Baby Doe' rules discriminate against infants?\",\"authors\":\"G E Jones\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This essay consists of a critical examination of the 'Baby Doe' rules with respect to their proscription of references to quality of life considerations as a basis for treatment decisions. It is argued that the rules cannot and should not obviate references to the infant's quality of life. Further, it is argued that there are not sufficient differences between infants and adult incompetent patients to justify the use of quality of life assessments with regard to the latter and not the former.\",\"PeriodicalId\":77588,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pediatrician\",\"volume\":\"17 2\",\"pages\":\"87-91\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1990-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pediatrician\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pediatrician","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

这篇文章包括对“婴儿Doe”规则的批判性审查，涉及到他们禁止参考生活质量考虑作为治疗决策的基础。有人认为，这些规则不能也不应该避免提及婴儿的生活质量。此外，有人认为婴儿和成年无能患者之间没有足够的差异来证明对后者而不是前者使用生活质量评估是合理的。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

Do the 'Baby Doe' rules discriminate against infants?

This essay consists of a critical examination of the 'Baby Doe' rules with respect to their proscription of references to quality of life considerations as a basis for treatment decisions. It is argued that the rules cannot and should not obviate references to the infant's quality of life. Further, it is argued that there are not sufficient differences between infants and adult incompetent patients to justify the use of quality of life assessments with regard to the latter and not the former.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Pediatrician

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊最新文献

Coronaviral infection Management of asthma in early life. Neuropsychologic (cognitive) disabilities in long-term survivors of childhood cancer. Epidemiology of asthma in childhood. Pathogenesis of asthma.