How to reach trustworthy decisions for caesarean sections on maternal request: a call for beneficial power
Open Access
- 14 October 2020
- journal article
- research article
- Published by BMJ in Journal of Medical Ethics
- Vol. 47 (12), e45
- https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2020-106071
Abstract
Caesarean delivery is a common and life-saving intervention. However, it involves an overall increased risk for short-term and long-term complications for both mother and child compared with vaginal delivery. From a medical point of view, healthcare professionals should, therefore, not recommend caesarean sections without any anticipated medical benefit. Consequently, caesarean sections requested by women for maternal reasons can cause conflict between professional recommendations and maternal autonomy. How can we assure ethically justified decisions in the case of caesarean sections on maternal request in healthcare systems that also respect patients’ autonomy and aspire for shared decisions? In the maternal–professional relationship, which can be characterised in terms of reciprocal obligations and rights, women may not be entitled to demand a C-section. Nevertheless, women have a right to respect for their deliberative capacity in the decision-making process. How should we deal with a situation of non-agreement between a woman and healthcare professional when the woman requests a caesarean section in the absence of obvious medical indications? In this paper, we illustrate how the maternal–professional relationship is embedded in a nexus of power, trust and risk that reinforces a structural inferiority for women. To accommodate for beneficial use of power, these decision processes need to be trustworthy. We propose a framework, inspired by Lukes’ three-dimensional notion of power, which serves to facilitate trust and allows for beneficial power in shared processes of decision-making about the delivery mode for women requesting planned C-sections.Keywords
Funding Information
- Universitetet i Bergen (PhD Scholarship "no grant/award number")
This publication has 47 references indexed in Scilit:
- Pregnancy Outcome and Risk of Celiac Disease in Offspring: A Nationwide Case-Control StudyGastroenterology, 2012
- Why do some pregnant women prefer cesarean? The influence of parity, delivery experiences, and fearAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2011
- Cesarean Section without Medical Reason, 1997 to 2006: A Swedish Register StudyBirth, 2010
- Power, Trust, and Risk:Medical Anthropology Quarterly, 2009
- Cesarean delivery on maternal request: maternal and neonatal complicationsCurrent Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2008
- Cesarean section and maternal education; secular trends in Norway, 1967–2004Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 2007
- Maternal Request Cesarean Versus Planned Spontaneous Vaginal Delivery: Maternal Morbidity and Short Term OutcomesSeminars in Perinatology, 2006
- Planned cesarean versus planned vaginal delivery at term: Comparison of newborn infant outcomesAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2006
- Caesarean section on request: a comparison of obstetricians’ attitudes in eight European countriesBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 2006
- Indications for caesarean section in a consultant obstetric unit over three decadesJournal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 2003