Should It Be Legal For A Doctor To Lie To A Woman About Any Fetal Abnormalities?

Bowerbirds 'wrongful birth' thread got me thinking about what the lifers would think about this one.

If a doctor knows there is, or may be, a serious problem with the fetus, should he be required to tell the expectant woman, so that she is aware of the problem?
Whether she then obtains an abortion is not relevant. I just wonder whether lifers would prefer a doctor to lie to a woman in order to prevent her from having an abortion.

A few years ago I read a book called 'Handle With Care'. Its by Jodi Picoult, and is about a mother who sues her best friend for not picking up on a fetal defect that was obvious at the time, but the friend just didn't think it was serious. The baby was born with brittle bones which broke easily. The mother won the case, by the way. The money was needed to pay for the childs medical bills.

If a doctor was aware that a problem like this existed, wouldn't he be bound to inform the parents? As I assume doctors already are bound to inform the parents of something like this, do lifers want this changed? Would they prefer that doctors tell a woman her fetus is perfectly healthy when it is actually severely ill?

 

It's the doctor's job to give the patient all the information concerning her condition or her child's condition. That's what he's being paid to do. He has no right to withhold information. Possible problems should be given a range of probability so the woman can make an informed decision.

 

My thoughts exactly.

 

Morally? Yes if he knows she will kill the child if she knows the truth. Legally? No it will not be condoned.

 

So its okay for lifers to lie to women, but not okay for choicers to lie to women?

Nice set of double standards you got there, Whaler.

 

Except choicers don't lie to women, we don't need to.

Although apparently lifers will do it if they feel it's necessary.

 

I don't think doctors should lie to patients about anything. Lying is the province of politicians and lawyers and yes, I realize that is often redundant.

 

It is acceptable and actually legal for police to lie to killers in the process of gathering information.

 

That was a lie as well.

 

Wow, I almost never agree with anything that OKgrannie says, but this post is spot on! I couldn't have said it better myself. Everyone deserves to know all medical facts regarding any medical condition. It is their right and it is the duty of the doctor to inform.

 

Generally I agree as well, but when doctors engage in committing homicides (abortions) instead of acting to heal and preserve life, it pollutes the entire health care system.

 

Thank you, dear, you just keep listening to me and you'll begin to see the sense in what I say.

 

That is certainly not likely!

 

Delusions of grandeur? You are now the police too? But at least you are confirming what you truly are, an authoritarian who wants to be in control. The bad news for you is that you never will be.

 

Doctors should tell their patients what the facts are all the time.

Problem is, doctors are not always right. A doctor could diagnose a baby with some sort of defect and then when born the baby is perfectly healthy. Which happens.

The doctor's job morally and ethically is to err on the side of life. Justifying abortion b/c a baby has a defect isn't morally or ethically acceptable. Reason being, doctors are human beings, and there is human error built into every decision made.

If a doctor thinks a baby has problems, then he should let the couple know as soon as he sees something wrong, so that they can do the proper tests to better diagnose any defect present, if any. Problem is, some tests that go into the womb can harm the baby as well, so there is risk with that, and you could be doing a test on a perfectly healthy baby.

If the woman is going to have the baby regardless of any defects, then all other testing for defects are meaningless and a wste of time and money.

Bottom line, doctors should give their patients the facts, and that goes for PP doctors as well, who tell their patients that the baby growing inside them isn't a baby at all but a cluster of cells.

 

Let me clarify, if the patient the doctor is seeing has past history of harming themselves or others, only then does a doctor have the moral and ethical stance to not divulge everything to the patient until the doctor knows the patient is in a position to handle the news accordingly. That might require family and friends present at the time or other medical staff present.

 

There goes that glaring lack of reading comprehension of yours again, I never claimed to be the police Poindexter.

BTW, what about the police do you see as "Grand"?

 

Abortion isn't a crime, so doctors have no justification to lie to women.

Would you prefer to see a woman abort a severely ill fetus, or have her give birth to what she believes is a healthy baby, only to be told it is seriously ill and will require expensive treatment its entire life - treatment she cannot afford?

You want to help her out and write her a cheque, Whaler?

 

I'm no medical law expert but doing so sounds like a blatant violation of the hippocratic oath.

 

You are right that sometimes doctors can get it wrong. They have before. Often, they are right, though - at least I like to think they are. No one wants to assume the doctor is wrong. They are supposed to know what they are doing.

You are also correct that some tests can harm the growing fetus - the test for Down Syndrome carries a risk of miscarriage, so only women at high risk are referred for testing - although I believe the test is available to anyone if requested.

I disagree with you about PP doctors and your 'cluster of cells' comment. There is nothing that even remotely resembles a baby in the first few weeks. That cluster of cells is yet to form something that looks like a baby - so describing it as a cluster isn't dehumanising it, just stating what is true. I am aware of your opinion though, so I shall agree to disagree with you.

But - if you knew there was a chance that the woman would have an abortion if she learned that there were potential problems with her baby, would you still agree with doctors telling their patients everything?

 

Well we all know that is your OPINION.

In other words, "do I approve of homicide as a means of avoiding a financial commitment?", Hell no!!!!

I didn't take the risk, it is her and his responsibility

 

As is intentionally killing a child in utero.

 

I'm having trouble imagining any example where a doctor could ethically lie to his patient about her medical condition.

 

Personally....I would expect my doctor to be truthful.

I had a pro-life doctor--and he was upfront with that. But he would have been truthful if their was defects. And...its not just the doctor...the nurses and assistants and lab workers are all involved. It just wouldn't be realistic to assume a doctor of any life or choice inclination would lie.

 

That is an interesting point and I agree, but just as a point of interest want to mention that back in the '60 even '70 in Eastern Europe, cancer patients were routinely not told what afflicted them. It was done on the premise that it would eliminate hope and positive attitude that is crucial for healing, that just in case some miracle could or would happen.