scholarly journals Consenting to invasive contraceptives: an ethical analysis of adolescent decision-making authority for long-acting reversible contraception

2018 ◽  
Vol 44 (9) ◽  
pp. 585-588 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosemary Talbot Behmer Hansen ◽  
Kavita Shah Arora

Since USA constitutional precedent established in 1976, adolescents have increasingly been afforded the right to access contraception without first obtaining parental consent or authorisation. There is general agreement this ethically permissible. However, long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) methods have only recently been prescribed to the adolescent population. They are currently the most effective forms of contraception available and have high compliance and satisfaction rates. Yet unlike other contraceptives, LARCs are associated with special procedural risks because they must be inserted and removed by trained healthcare providers. It is unclear whether the unique invasive nature of LARC changes the traditional ethical calculus of permitting adolescent decision-making in the realm of contraception. To answer this question, we review the risk–benefit profile of adolescent LARC use. Traditional justifications for permitting adolescent contraception decision-making authority are then considered in the context of LARCs. Finally, analogous reasoning is used to evaluate potential differences between permitting adolescents to consent for LARC procedures versus for emergency and pregnancy termination procedures. Ultimately, we argue that the invasive nature of LARCs does not override adolescents’ unique and compelling need for safe and effective forms of contraception. In fact, LARCs may oftentimes be in the best interest of adolescent patients who wish to prevent unintended pregnancy. We advocate for the specific enumeration of adolescents’ ability to consent to both LARC insertion and removal procedures within state policies. Given the provider-dependent nature of LARCs and the stigma regarding adolescent sexuality, special political and procedural safeguards to protect adolescent autonomy are warranted.

2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
M Bayefsky ◽  
V Dorice ◽  
A Caplan ◽  
G Quinn

Abstract Study question Periodically, parents and children disagree about whether to pursue fertility preservation (FP). How should medical teams navigate these ethically complex situations? Summary answer Several considerations must be weighed, including the minor’s age, the burden of the proposed procedure, and whether the minor or parent seeks to decline FP. What is known already As reproductive technology advances, FP prior to gonadotoxic therapy has become the standard of care. Periodically, parents and children disagree about whether to pursue FP. To date, there is no clear guidance on how to navigate these difficult situations. Prior studies have demonstrated that adolescents undergoing gonadotoxic therapy want their views regarding FP to be taken into account, and also that most children and adolescents are comfortable with parental involvement in decision-making. However, transgender adolescents pursue FP at lower rates than adolescents with cancer, and more research is required to elucidate the unique needs and barriers of transgender youth. Study design, size, duration This study involves a scoping review and ethical analysis about parent-child disagreement regarding FP in minors. The review analyzes papers that either demonstrate that parent-child disagreement occurs, describe the preferences of parents or children regarding decision-making around FP, or provide recommendations that can be used to resolve parent-child conflicts. The ethical analysis weighs relevant rights and interests, including the child’s best interest, the right to an open future, the child’s autonomy, and parental autonomy. Participants/materials, setting, methods A search string was developed to identify all relevant published manuscripts on the topic of FP in minors, including studies on decision-making, family relations and ethical challenges. The search was run through several databases, abstracts were screened using Covidence, and data were extracted from full texts. Data abstracted from the review and existing literature on general medical decision-making for minors were used to construct an ethical framework for parent-child disagreements regarding FP in minors. Main results and the role of chance Published work directly on the topic of parent-child disputes regarding FP is limited, however a number of studies tangentially discuss parent-child disagreements and provide insight into the desires of parents and children regarding decision-making around FP. Studies suggest that adolescents desire to have their views taken into account, and a minority of adolescents believe their wishes alone should be followed. The age of the minor is a crucial factor, and some propose that as adolescents approach adulthood, their autonomy should increase. At the same time, in practice, legal and financial constraints often render parents the ultimate decision-makers. Our ethical analysis weighs competing considerations, including the child’s best interest, the right to an open future, the child’s autonomy, and parental autonomy. It concludes that who prevails should depend on contextual factors, including the minor’s age, the burden of the proposed procedure, and whether the minor or parent seeks to decline FP. There may also be special considerations for transgender adolescents, some of whom might have deeply personal reasons for pursuing or forgoing FP that are not well-understood by cisgender parents. Limitations, reasons for caution The scoping review captured a variety of results, including survey and interview studies, society guidelines, and ethical analyses. As such, we were unable to define a uniform quality metric. However, we aimed to be more rather than less inclusive because of the limited results directly pertaining to parent-child disagreements. Wider implications of the findings: This study provides a robust review of decision-making for FP in minors and offers an ethical framework for weighing countervailing considerations when parents and children disagree about whether to pursue FP. The conclusions can be used to inform guidance for clinicians presented with this challenging ethical dilemma. Trial registration number N/A


Author(s):  
Beth A. Clark ◽  
Alice Virani

AbstractInherent in providing healthcare for youth lie tensions among best interests, decision-making capacity, rights, and legal authority. Transgender (trans) youth experience barriers to needed gender-affirming care, often rooted in ethical and legal issues, such as healthcare provider concerns regarding youth capacity and rights to consent to hormone therapy. Even when decision-making capacity is present, youth may lack the legal authority to give consent. The aims of this paper are therefore to provide an empirical analysis of minor trans youth capacity to consent to hormone therapy and to address the normative question of whether there is ethical justification for granting trans youth the authority to consent to this care. Through qualitative content analysis of interviews with trans youth, parents, and healthcare providers, we found that trans youth demonstrated the understandings and abilities characteristic of the capacity to consent to hormone therapy and that they did consent to hormone therapy with positive outcomes. Employing deontological and consequentialist reasoning and drawing on a foundation of empirical evidence, human rights, and best interests we conclude that granting trans youth with decisional capacity both the right and the legal authority to consent to hormone therapy via the informed consent model of care is ethically justified.


2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
M Bayefsky ◽  
V Dorice ◽  
A Caplan ◽  
G Quinn

Abstract Study question Periodically, parents and children disagree about whether to pursue fertility preservation (FP). How should medical teams navigate these ethically complex situations? Summary answer Several considerations must be weighed, including the minor’s age, the burden of the proposed procedure, and whether the minor or parent seeks to decline FP. What is known already As reproductive technology advances, FP prior to gonadotoxic therapy has become the standard of care. Periodically, parents and children disagree about whether to pursue FP. To date, there is no clear guidance on how to navigate these difficult situations. Prior studies have demonstrated that adolescents undergoing gonadotoxic therapy want their views regarding FP to be taken into account, and also that most children and adolescents are comfortable with parental involvement in decision-making. However, transgender adolescents pursue FP at lower rates than adolescents with cancer, and more research is required to elucidate the unique needs and barriers of transgender youth. Study design, size, duration This study involves a scoping review and ethical analysis about parent-child disagreement regarding FP in minors. The review analyzes papers that either demonstrate that parent-child disagreement occurs, describe the preferences of parents or children regarding decision-making around FP, or provide recommendations that can be used to resolve parent-child conflicts. The ethical analysis weighs relevant rights and interests, including the child’s best interest, the right to an open future, the child’s autonomy, and parental autonomy. Participants/materials, setting, methods A search string was developed to identify all relevant published manuscripts on the topic of FP in minors, including studies on decision-making, family relations and ethical challenges. The search was run through several databases, abstracts were screened using Covidence, and data were extracted from full texts. Data abstracted from the review and existing literature on general medical decision-making for minors were used to construct an ethical framework for parent-child disagreements regarding FP in minors. Main results and the role of chance Published work directly on the topic of parent-child disputes regarding FP is limited, however a number of studies tangentially discuss parent-child disagreements and provide insight into the desires of parents and children regarding decision-making around FP. Studies suggest that adolescents desire to have their views taken into account, and a minority of adolescents believe their wishes alone should be followed. The age of the minor is a crucial factor, and some propose that as adolescents approach adulthood, their autonomy should increase. At the same time, in practice, legal and financial constraints often render parents the ultimate decision-makers. Our ethical analysis weighs competing considerations, including the child’s best interest, the right to an open future, the child’s autonomy, and parental autonomy. It concludes that who prevails should depend on contextual factors, including the minor’s age, the burden of the proposed procedure, and whether the minor or parent seeks to decline FP. There may also be special considerations for transgender adolescents, some of whom might have deeply personal reasons for pursuing or forgoing FP that are not well-understood by cisgender parents. Limitations, reasons for caution The scoping review captured a variety of results, including survey and interview studies, society guidelines, and ethical analyses. As such, we were unable to define a uniform quality metric. However, we aimed to be more rather than less inclusive because of the limited results directly pertaining to parent-child disagreements. Wider implications of the findings This study provides a robust review of decision-making for FP in minors and offers an ethical framework for weighing countervailing considerations when parents and children disagree about whether to pursue FP. The conclusions can be used to inform guidance for clinicians presented with this challenging ethical dilemma. Trial registration number N/A


Author(s):  
Leonor Teixeira ◽  
Vasco Saavedra ◽  
João Pedro Simões

This chapter describes a monitoring system based on alerts and Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), applied in clinical context, within a chronic disease (haemophilia). This kind of disease follows the patient through his/her life, and its treatment requires an almost permanent exchange of data/information with healthcare professional (HCPs), with the information and communications technologies (ICTs) a key contribution in this process. However, most applications based on those ICTs do not allow the analysis of heterogeneous data in real-time, requiring the availability of clinicians to check the data and analyze the information to support the clinical decision process. Since time is a scarce resource in the context of healthcare providers, and information a crucial resource in the decision support process, real-time monitoring systems can help finding the right balance between those two resources, presenting the key information in an appropriate format, through alerts and KPIs. The system described in this chapter, named hemo@care_dashboard, aims to support clinical decision-making of healthcare professionals of a specific chronic disease, providing real-time information in a push-logic through alerts and KPIs, displayed on a dashboard.


Author(s):  
Zeev Rosberger ◽  
Sylvie Aubin ◽  
Barry D. Bultz ◽  
Peter Chan

Cancer and cancer therapies (e.g. surgery, chemotherapy, radiation) may have a significant impact on fertility for both young men and women, resulting in distress regarding future parenting options. Fertility preservation (FP) is available through sperm cryopreservation and for women through oocyte or embryo cryopreservation. While normal fertility will occur after treatment for many patients in the survivorship phase, assisted reproductive therapy (ART) may be the only option for some. Because of this uncertainty, healthcare providers must discuss this challenge immediately after diagnosis to facilitate decision-making regarding FP, and at all points along the continuum with patients and their families to ensure that the right information and choices are clearly shared. Research has shown that timely communication can result in successful outcomes for patients wishing to have children after treatment completion.


2015 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 267 ◽  
Author(s):  
Riham Adel Hassan Sayed Ahmed

<p>The paper addresses the contemporary question of social media role as credible and trustworthy source of information. However, social media have provided healthcare organizations with new opportunities to communicate and engage with consumers. Nevertheless, healthcare providers should understand the key stages of consumers’ decision-making and tailor the right message at the right time, in the right place to the right consumers’ segment, which will to increase their chance of reaching and influencing consumers’ behaviors and perceptions.</p>


1995 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 524-529 ◽  
Author(s):  
Terri R. Fried ◽  
Muriel R. Gillick

Traditionally, surrogates have been involved principally in making decisions about life-sustaining treatment for incompetent individuals. Today, surrogates are increasingly called upon to make everyday medical decisions for patients who are incompetent because they are demented. Some of the potential perils of proxy decision making under these circumstances have been identified, including the lack of concordance between patients and their proxies, demands by proxies for technically futile therapy, and actual abuse of patients. We found a significant number of cases in which healthcare providers at a long-term care facility came into conflict with surrogates because the treatment desired by the surrogate was viewed as excessively burdensome when evaluated by an experienced team of nurses, physicians, and social workers. Neither a court-appointed guardian nor an Institutional ethics committee were likely to be able to resolve these conflicts because of lack of clarity about what constitutes the best Interest of Impaired nursing home patients. The following case illustrates this increasingly common conflict.


2015 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 312-325 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kara W. Swanson

In 1954, American women experienced an unwanted pregnancy as presenting a difficult choice between bearing an unwanted child and risking an illegal abortion. Yet obstetrician/gynecologist Alan Guttmacher described abortion as “the doctor’s dilemma.” Guttmacher and his medical colleagues experienced a dilemma when their professional judgment that pregnancy termination was warranted clashed with the laws criminalizing most abortions. In that situation, the law constrained their ability to make a decision they felt to be in the best interest of a patient. To doctors, such paternalist decision-making was a bedrock principle of 20th-century medicine. Doctors had an obligation to provide, or deny, treatment to patients for their own good. This duty arose from medical expertise and separated the medical profession from lesser medical practitioners.


PEDIATRICS ◽  
1996 ◽  
Vol 97 (5) ◽  
pp. 746-751
Author(s):  

In this statement, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) reaffirms its position that the rights of adolescents to confidential care when considering abortion should be protected. The AAP supports the recommendations presented in the report on mandatory parental consent to abortion by the Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs of the American Medical Association. Adolescents should be strongly encouraged to involve their parents and other trusted adults in decisions regarding pregnancy termination, and the majority of them voluntarily do so. Legislation mandating parental involvement does not achieve the intended benefit of promoting family communication, but it does increase the risk of harm to the adolescent by delaying access to appropriate medical care. The statement presents a summary of pertinent current information related to the benefits and risks of legislation requiring mandatory parental involvement in an adolescent's decision to obtain an abortion. The AAP acknowledges and respects the diversity of beliefs about abortion and affirms the value of voluntary parental involvement in decision making by adolescents.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document