Conscientious objection and barriers to abortion within a specific regional context - an expert interview study.

BACKGROUND: While most countries that allow abortion on women's request also grant physicians a right to conscientious objection (CO), this has proven to constitute a potential barrier to abortion access. Conscientious objection is regarded as an understudied phenomenon the effects of which have not yet been examined in Germany. Based on expert interviews, this study aims to exemplarily reconstruct the processes of abortion in a mid-sized city in Germany, and to identify potential effects of conscientious objection. METHODS: Five semi-structured interviews with experts from all instances involved have been conducted in April 2020. The experts gave an insight into the medical care structures with regard to abortion procedures, the application and manifestations of conscientious objection in medical practice, and its impact on the care of pregnant women. A content analysis of the transcribed interviews was performed. RESULTS: Both the procedural processes and the effects of conscientious objection are reported to differ significantly between early abortions performed before the 12th week of pregnancy and late abortions performed at the second and third trimester. Conscientious objection shows structural consequences as it is experienced to further reduce the number of possible providers, especially for early abortions. On the individual level of the doctor-patient relationship, the experts confirmed the neutrality and patient-orientation of the vast majority of doctors. Still, it is especially late abortions that seem to be vulnerable to barriers imposed by conscientious objection in individual medical encounters. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that conscientious objection possibly imposes barriers to both early and late abortion provision and especially in the last procedural steps, which from an ethical point of view is especially problematic. To oblige hospitals to partake in abortion provision in Germany has the potential to prevent negative impacts of conscientious objection on women's rights on an individual as well as on a structural level.

The fetus in the age of the genome.

Due to a number of recent achievements, the field of prenatal medicine is now on the verge of a profound transformation into prenatal genomic medicine. This transformation is expected to not only substantially expand the spectrum of prenatal diagnostic and screening possibilities, but finally also to advance fetal care and the prenatal management of certain fetal diseases and malformations. It will come along with new and profound challenges for the normative framework and clinical care pathways in prenatal (and reproductive) medicine. To adequately address the potential ethically challenging aspects without discarding the obvious benefits, several agents are required to engage in different debates. The permissibility of the sequencing of the whole fetal exome or genome will have to be examined from a philosophical and legal point of view, in particular with regard to conflicts with potential rights of future children. A second requirement is a societal debate on the question of priority setting and justice in relation to prenatal genomic testing. Third, a professional-ethical debate and positioning on the goal of prenatal genomic testing and a consequential re-structuring of clinical care pathways seems to be important. In all these efforts, it might be helpful to envisage the unborn rather not as a fetus, not as a separate moral subject and a second "patient", but in its unique physical connection with the pregnant woman, and to accept the moral quandaries implicitly given in this situation.

[Advance Directives in Exceptional Situations]. / Patientenverfügungen in Grenzsituationen.

Advance Directives in Exceptional Situations Abstract. Advance directives are an important instrument to support the autonomy of patients in clinical settings. However, when the will documented in an advance directive is at odds with the current preferences of an incompetent or partially competent patient, particularly challenging decision-making situations arise for all involved. These will first be illustrated by means of a case example and then analyzed in terms of the most important ethical lines of argumentation. The expected duration of the patient's incapacity to make decisions is an important parameter from an ethical point of view. If the incapacity is permanent or increasing, as in the case of dementia, for example, attention should be paid to supporting the patient's remaining self-determination in the best possible way. This means that current preferences and statements of the partially or no longer competent patient must also be taken into account when interpreting an advance directive and planning the next steps.

Ethics experts and fetal patients: a proposal for modesty.

BACKGROUND: Ethics consultation is recognized as an opportunity to share responsibility for difficult decisions in prenatal medicine, where moral intuitions are often unable to lead to a settled decision. It remains unclear, however, if the general standards of ethics consultation are applicable to the very particular setting of pregnancy. MAIN TEXT: We sought to analyze the special nature of disagreements, conflicts and value uncertainties in prenatal medicine as well as the ways in which an ethics consultation service (ECS) could possibly respond to them and illustrated our results with a case example. Ethics facilitation and conflict mediation, currently, have no broadly consented normative framework encompassing prenatal diagnosis and therapy as well as reproductive choice to draw on. Even so, they can still be helpful instruments for ethically challenging decision-making in prenatal medicine provided two additional rules are respected: For the time being, ECSs should (a) refrain from issuing content-heavy recommendations in prenatal medicine and (b) should not initiate conflict mediations that would involve the pregnant woman or couple as a conflict party. CONCLUSION: It seems to be vital that ethics consultants as well as health care professionals acknowledge the current limitations and pitfalls of ethics consultation in prenatal medicine and together engage in the advancement of standards for this particularly complex setting.

Is there a need for a clear advice? A retrospective comparative analysis of ethics consultations with and without recommendations in a maximum-care university hospital.

BACKGROUND: The theory and practice of ethics consultations (ECs) in health care are still characterized by many controversies, including, for example, the practice of giving recommendations. These controversies are complicated by an astonishing lack of evidence in the whole field. It is not clear how often a recommendation is issued in ethics consultations and when and why this step is taken. Especially in a facilitation model in which giving recommendations is optional, more data would be helpful to evaluate daily practice, ensure that this practice is in line with the overarching goals of this approach and support the development of standards. METHODS: We analyzed all consultations requested from an EC service working under a facilitation approach at a maximum-care university hospital in Germany over a period of more than 10 years. Our aim was to better understand why-and under what circumstances-some consultation requests result in a recommendation, whereas others can be sufficiently addressed solely by facilitated meetings. We especially wanted to know when and why clients felt the need for clear advice from the EC service while in other cases they did not. We compared ethics consultations in terms of the differences between cases with and without recommendations issued by the ethics consultants using χ2 difference tests and Welch's t-test. RESULTS: A total of 243 ECs were carried out between September 2008 and December 2019. In approximately half of the cases, a recommendation was given. All recommendations were issued upon the request of clients. When physicians asked for an EC, the consultation was significantly more likely to result in a recommendation than when the EC was requested by any other party. ECs in cases on wards with ethics rounds resulted in comparably fewer recommendations than those in wards without ethics rounds. When interpersonal conflicts were part of the problem or relatives were present in the meeting, clients less frequently asked for a recommendation. CONCLUSION: From the client's point of view, there does not seem to be only one "right" way to provide ethics consultations, but rather several. While facilitated meetings are obviously appreciated by clients, there also seem to be situations in which a recommendation is desired (especially by physicians). Further empirical and theoretical research is needed to validate our single-center results and re-evaluate the role of recommendations in ethics consultations.

Why public funding for non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) might still be wrong: a response to Bunnik and colleagues.

Bunnik and colleagues argued that financial barriers do not promote informed decision-making prior to prenatal screening and raise justice concerns. If public funding is provided, however, it would seem to be important to clarify its intentions and avoid any unwarranted appearance of a medical utility of the testing.

Ethics rounds: affecting ethics quality at all organisational levels.

Clinical ethics support (CES) services are experiencing a phase of flourishing and of growing recognition. At the same time, however, the expectations regarding the acceptance and the integration of traditional CES services into clinical processes are not met. Ethics rounds as an additional instrument or as an alternative to traditional clinical ethics support strategies might have the potential to address both deficits. By implementing ethics rounds, we were able to better address the needs of the clinical sections and to develop a more comprehensive account of ethics quality in our hospital, which covers the level of decisions and actions, and also the level of systems and processes and aspects of ethical leadership.

Lost in Translation? Ethical Challenges of Implementing a New Diagnostic Procedure.

Since cell-free DNA (cfDNA) fragments of placental origin can be isolated and analyzed from the blood of pregnant women. Applications of this finding have been developed and implemented in clinical care pathways worldwide at an unprecedented pace and manner. Implementation patterns, however, exhibit considerable insufficiencies. Different "motors" of implementation processes, like the market or various regulatory institutions, can be identified at a national level. Each "motor" entails characteristic ethical challenges which are exemplified impressively by a rising number of case reports.Empirical data demonstrate that there are significant "losses" in the respective translational processes, especially when the results from clinical research are to be translated into the clinical reality of NIPT (the so called "second roadblock" (T2)). These "losses" are perceived in the fields of knowledge transfer, professional standardization and ethical debate. Recommendations of professional organizations often fail to reach general practitioners. Blindsided by the new diagnostic procedure in their clinical practice, professionals in prenatal care express their insecurities with regard to its handling. Ethical debate appears to adhere to pre-existing (and partly already proven to be insufficient) normative frameworks for prenatal testing. While all of these deficits are typical for the implementation processes of many new molecular diagnostic procedures, especially in NIPT, they show a high variability between different nations.A critical assessment of the preferred strategy of implementation against the background of already existing national ethical frameworks is indispensable, if potential adverse effects are to be diminished. The described translational losses seem to be significantly reducible by granting the translational process in roadblock T2 more time.

A new era in prenatal testing: are we prepared?

Prenatal care and the practice of prenatal genetic testing are about to be changed fundamentally. Due to several ground-breaking technological developments prenatal screening and diagnosis (PND) will soon be offered earlier in gestation, with less procedure-related risks and for a profoundly enlarged variety of targets. In this paper it is argued that the existing normative framework for prenatal screening and diagnosis cannot answer adequately to these new developments. In concentrating on issues of informed consent and the reproductive autonomy of the pregnant women the ethical debate misses problems related to the clinical pathway as a whole and to implicit normative attributions to clinical actions or the function of health care professionals. If, however, ethical debate would focus on the clinical context and on the ends of PND to a larger extent, it would be able to provide a more comprehensive analysis of the ethical challenges especially of the new technologies in order to be more adequately prepared for their implementation.

Terminating pregnancy after prenatal diagnosis--with a little help of professional ethics?

Termination of pregnancy after a certain gestational age and following prenatal diagnosis, in many nations seem to be granted with a special status to the extent that they by law have to be discussed within a predominantly medical context and have physicians as third parties involved in the decision-making process ('indication-based' approach). The existing legal frameworks for indication-based approaches, however, do frequently fail to provide clear guidance for the involved physicians. Critics, therefore, asked for professional ethics and professional institutions in order to provide normative guidance for the physicians in termination of pregnancy on medical grounds. After outlining the clinical pathway in an indication-based approach and the involved types of (clinical) judgements, this paper draws upon different understandings of professional ethics in order to explore their potential to provide normative guidance in termination of pregnancy on medical grounds. The analysis reveals that professional ethics will not suffice-neither as a set of established norms nor as internal morality-in order to determine the normative framework of indication-based approaches on termination of pregnancy. In addition, there seem to be considerable inconsistencies regarding the target and outcome between prenatal testing on the one hand and following termination of pregnancy on the other hand. A source of morality external to medicine has to be the basis of evaluation if a consistent and workable normative framework for termination of pregnancy and prenatal testing should be established.

Induction of Labour. Guideline of the DGGG, OEGGG and SGGG (S2k, AWMF Registry No. 015-088, December 2020).

Aim The aim of this official guideline published and coordinated by the German Society of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (DGGG) in cooperation with the Austrian Society of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (OEGGG) and the Swiss Society of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (SGGG) is to provide a consensus-based overview of the indications, methods and general management of induction of labour by evaluating the relevant literature. Methods This S2k guideline was developed using a structured consensus process which included representative members from various professions; the guideline was commissioned by the guidelines commission of the DGGG, OEGGG and SGGG. Recommendations The guideline provides recommendations on the indications, management, methods, monitoring and special situations occurring in the context of inducing labour.

Exceptional know how? Possible pitfalls of routinising genetic services.

Genetic testing practices are increasingly advancing clinical medicine. This process of 'routinisation of genetics' has been conceived as a medical and ethical problem mainly because of the assumption that non-geneticists might lack the necessary skills to provide these services. In particular, the relevant theoretical knowledge in clinical genetics is viewed as insufficient in general practitioners and physicians from other specialities. Empirical findings seem to indicate significant variations not only in theoretical but also in practical knowledge between geneticists and non-geneticists. Several fields of practical knowledge-regarding for example the focus of clinical action, the relevance of therapeutic action or the normative framework-can be identified that are or could be areas of conflict when the routinisation of genetic services proceeds. From an ethical point of view, these variations in know how and background are especially relevant whenever the respective genetic service is concerned with medical information of exceptional normative quality, such as, for example, in prenatal genetic screening and diagnosis of untreatable conditions. Here, the clinically acquired practical knowledge of the non-geneticist could be particularly misleading insofar as there is no relation to therapy and-in a narrow sense-no clinical utility to be assessed. Non-geneticists need a chance to acquire the relevant theoretical and practical knowledge in order to understand and fulfil their own duties in the respective situations in a way that secures the important rights at stake of their patients and clients.

Intrauterine Growth Restriction. Guideline of the German Society of Gynecology and Obstetrics (S2k-Level, AWMF Registry No. 015/080, October 2016).

AIMS: The aim of this official guideline published and coordinated by the German Society of Gynecology and Obstetrics (DGGG) was to provide consensus-based recommendations obtained by evaluating the relevant literature for the diagnostic treatment and management of women with fetal growth restriction. METHODS: This S2k guideline represents the structured consensus of a representative panel of experts with a range of different professional backgrounds commissioned by the Guideline Committee of the DGGG. RECOMMENDATIONS: Recommendations for diagnostic treatment, management, counselling, prophylaxis and screening are presented.

Unfair discrimination in prenatal aneuploidy screening using cell-free DNA?

Non-invasive prenatal testing on the basis of cell-free DNA of placental origin (NIPT) changed the landscape of prenatal care and is seen as superior to all other up to now implemented prenatal screening procedures - at least in the high-risk population. NIPT has spread almost worldwide commercially, but only in a few countries the costs of NIPT are covered by insurance companies. Such financial barriers in prenatal testing can lead to significant restrictions to the average range of opportunities of pregnant women and couples, which on an intersubjective level can be defined as unfair discrimination and on an individual level weakens reproductive autonomy. Given that enabling reproductive autonomy is the main ethical justification for offering prenatal (genetic) testing, these barriers are not only an issue of justice in health care, but are potentially counteracting the primary purpose of these testing procedures.

Informed consent in neurosurgery--translating ethical theory into action.

OBJECTIVE: Although a main principle of medical ethics and law since the 1970s, standards of informed consent are regarded with great scepticism by many clinicans. METHODS: By reviewing the reactions to and adoption of this principle of medical ethics in neurosurgery, the characteristic conflicts that emerge between theory and everyday clinical experience are emphasised and a modified conception of informed consent is proposed. RESULTS: The adoption and debate of informed consent in neurosurgery took place in two steps. Firstly, respect for patient autonomy was included into the ethical codes of the professional organisations. Secondly, the legal demands of the principle were questioned by clinicians. Informed consent is mainly interpreted in terms of freedom from interference and absolute autonomy. It lacks a constructive notion of physician-patient interaction in its effort to promote the best interest of the patient, which, however, potentially emerges from a reconsideration of the principle of beneficence. CONCLUSION: To avoid insufficient legal interpretations, informed consent should be understood in terms of autonomy and beneficence. A continuous interaction between the patient and the given physician is considered as an essential prerequisite for the realisation of the standards of informed consent.