Search results for: Marielle S. Gross
article
Hastings Center Report > 50 > 6 > 4 - 7
Melanie presented at twenty weeks of gestation to an obstetrics clinic in a critical access hospital in rural Vermont. She was excited to undergo routine fetal ultrasonography, but her obstetrician gave her grave news: the ultrasound revealed hypoplastic left heart syndrome, a devastating congenital heart defect. Initially, Melanie agreed in general to pursue surgical care for her fetus—a three‐stage process that has somewhat uncertain results and could only be done in tertiary care facilities far from her home in Vermont. A week later, while the maternal fetal medicine and pediatric cardiology units made arrangements with colleagues in Boston, Melanie began having second thoughts. An ethics meeting was called to discuss conflicting clinician reactions to Melanie's dilemma. Most of the clinicians were stunned that the patient would change her mind. What advice should the ethics consultant offer the team about caring for Melanie?
article
Maternal & Child Nutrition > 16 > 4 > n/a - n/a
The World Health Organization (WHO) has provided detailed guidance on the care of infants of women who are persons under investigation (PUI) or confirmed to have COVID‐19. The guidance supports immediate post‐partum mother–infant contact and breastfeeding with appropriate respiratory precautions. Although many countries have followed WHO guidance, others have implemented infection prevention and control...
article
Hastings Center Report > 50 > 3 > 40 - 43
Common hospital and surgical center responses to the Covid‐19 pandemic included curtailing “elective” procedures, which are typically determined based on implications for physical health and survival. However, in the focus solely on physical health and survival, procedures whose main benefits advance components of well‐being beyond health, including self‐determination, personal security, economic stability, equal respect, and creation of meaningful social relationships, have been disproportionately deprioritized. We describe how female reproduction‐related procedures, including abortion, surgical sterilization, reversible contraception devices and in vitro fertilization, have been broadly categorized as “elective,” a designation that fails to capture the value of these procedures or their impact on women's overall well‐being. We argue that corresponding restrictions and delays of these procedures are problematically reflective of underlying structural views that marginalize women's rights and interests and therefore threaten to propagate gender injustice during the pandemic and beyond. Finally, we propose a framework for triaging reproduction‐related procedures during Covid‐19 that is more individualized, accounts for their significance for comprehensive well‐being, and can be used to inform resumption of operations as well as subsequent restriction phases...
article
