Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Perspectives on Fetal Surgery

On the Road from Experimentation to Therapy (and What to Do When We Arrive)

  • Chapter
Genetics and the Law III

  • 114 Accesses

Abstract

In 1982, we wrote: “Experimentation with fetal surgery has come of age, and its routine clinical application seems inevitable.”1 We still believe this statement, but the road from experimentation to therapy will be longer than most observers had originally predicted. The results to date have been disappointing, and although research continues, there is no longer a general expectation of immediate therapeutic application of these new surgical techniques. Nonetheless, the stakes remain high and the implications of successful fetal surgery for medicine, society, the pregnant woman, and the fetus are profound. In this chapter we review the current medical indications for fetal surgery, as well as the major ethical and legal issues that the use of this technology raises now and in the future.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References and Notes

  1. Portions of this article are adapted from Elias, S. and Annas, G. J., Perspectives on fetal surgery, Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 145:807 (1983)

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Annas, G. J., Forced Ceasarian sections: The most unkindest cut of all, Hastings Cent. Rep. 12:16–17 (June 1982).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Harrison, M. R., Golbus, M. S., Berkowitz, R. S., et al. ,Occasional Notes, fetal treatment 1982, N. Engl. J Med. 307:1651–2 (1982).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Council Report. In utero fetal surgery. Resolution 73 (1–81); Council on Scientific Affairs, JAMA 250: 1443–4 (1983).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Liley, A. W., Intrauterine transfusions of fetus in haemolytic disease, Br. Med. J. 2:1107 (1963).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Queenan, J. T., Modern Management of the Rh Problem (2nd ed.), Harper & Row, Hagerstown, MD (1977).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Campbell, S., Early prenatal diagnosis of neural tube defects by ultrasound, Clin. Obstet. Gynecol. 20:351 (1977).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Denkhaus, H., and Winsberg, F., Ultrasound measurement of the fetal ventricular system, Radiology 131:781 (1979).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Chervenak, F. A., Berdowitz, R. L., Romero, R., et al. The diagnosis of fetal hydrocephalus, Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 147:703 (1983).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Clewell, W. H., Johnson, M. L., Meier, P. R., et al. Placement of ventriculoamniotic shunt for hydrocephalus in a fetus, N. Eng. J. Med. 305:944 (1981).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hecht, F., and Frix, Fr., A., Treatment of fetal hydrocephalus (letter), N. Eng. J. Med. 307:1211 (1982).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Depp, R., Sabbagha, R. E., Brown, J. T., et al. Fetal surgery for hydrocephalus: Successful in utero ventriculoamniotic shunt for Dandy-Walker syndrome, Obstit. Bynecil. 61:710 (1983).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Harrison, M. R., Bolbus, M. S., and Filly, R. A., The Unborn Patient: Prenatal Diagnosis and Treatment ,Grune and Stratton, Orlando (1984).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Hobbins, H. C., Grannum, P. A. T., Berkowitz, R. L., et al. ,Ultrasound in the diagnosis of congenital anomalies, Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 134:331 (1979).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Harrison, M. R., Golbus, M. S., Filly, R. A., et al. Fetal surgery for congenital hydronephrosis, N. Engl. J. Med. 306:591 (1982).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Golbus, M. S., Harrison, M. R., Filly, R. A., et al. In utero treatment of urinary tract obstruction, Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 142:383 (1982).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Harrison, M. R., Golbus, M. S., Filly, R. A., et al. Management of the fetus with congenital hydronephrosis, Pediatric Surg. 17:728 (1982).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Harrison, M. R., Ross, N. A., and de Lorimier, A. A., Correction of congenital diaphragmatic hernia in utero. III. Development of a successful surgical technique using abdominoplasty to avoid compromise of umbilical blood flow, J. Pediatr. Surg. 16:934 (1981).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Hodgen, G. K., Antenatal diagnosis and treatment of fetal skeletal malformations with emphasis on in utero surgery for neural tube defects and limb bud regeneration, JAMA 246:1079 (1981).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Haller, Fr., J. A., Kehrer, B. H., Shaker, I. J., et al. Studies of the pathophysiology of gastroschisis in fetal sheep, J. Pediatr. Surg. 9:627 (1974).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Oshio, A. T., and Komi, N., An experimental study of gastroschisis using fetal surgery, J. Pediatr. Surg. 15:252 (1980).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Michejda, M., Bacher, J., Kuwabara, T., and Hodge, G., In utero allogeneic bone transplantation in primates: Roentgenographic and histologic observations, Transplantation 32:96 (1981).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Hodgen, G. D., Antenatal diagnosis and treatment of fetal skeletal malformations with emphasis on in utero surgery for neural tube defects and limb bud regeneration, JAMA 246:1079 (1981).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Roe v. Wade ,410 U.S. 113 (1973). See Baron, C., Legislative regulation of fetal experimentation: On negotiating compromise in situations of ethical pluralism (this volume, pp. 435–437).

    Google Scholar 

  25. See, e.g., Jonsen, A., Fetal surgery (this volume, pp. 367–368).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Annas, G. J., Glantz, L. H., and Katz, B. F., Informed Consent to Human Experimentation: The Subject’s Dilemma ,Ballinger, Cambridge, MA (1977)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Friedman, J. M., The federal fetal experimentation regulations: An establishment clause analysis, Minn. Law Rev. 61:961 (1977)

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Brock, E. A., Fetal research: What price progress? Detroit Coll. Law Rev. 3:403 (1979).

    Google Scholar 

  29. See, e.g., Fox, R., and Swazey, J., The Courage to Fail ,U. Chicago Press, Chicago (1974).

    Google Scholar 

  30. Annas, G. J., Glantz, L. H., and Katz, B. F., The Rights of Doctors, Nurses, and Allied Health Professionals ,Ballinger, Cambridge, MA (1981)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Annas, G. J., Informed consent, Ann. Rev. Med. 29:9 (1978).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Karp v. Cooley ,349 F. Supp. 827 (S.D. Tex. 1972), affd, 493 F.2d 408 (5th Cir. 1974), discussed in Informed Consent, supra note 25 at 11–7.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Annas, G. J., and Densberger, J. E., Competence to refuse medical treatment: Autonomy vs. paternalism, Toledo L. Rev. 15:561 (1984).

    Google Scholar 

  34. Danforth v. Planned Parenthood ,428 U.S. 52 (1976).

    Google Scholar 

  35. Fletcher, J. C, The fetus as patient: Ethical issues, JAMA 246:772 (1981).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. See, e.g., Robertson, J., Procreative liberty, and the control of conception, pregnancy, and childbirth, Virginia Law Rev. 69:405, 441–7 (1983)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Shaw, M., Conditional prospective rights of the fetus, J. of Legal Medicine 5:63, 87–8 (1984).

    Google Scholar 

  38. Leiberman et al. ,The fetal right to live, Obstet. Gynec. 53:515 (1979).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Jefferson v. Griffen Spalding Co. Hospital Authority ,247 Ga. 86, 274 S.E. 2d 457 (1981). And see Note on this case, W. New Eng. L. Rev. 5:125 (1982).

    Google Scholar 

  40. American Medical News (Feb. 19, 1982) at 11.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Goldman, E. B., Fetal versus maternal rights: Who is the patient? Mich. Hospitals (Apr. 1983), 23–25, in which the lawyer for the hospital in this case discusses it as a hypothetical.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Gallager, J., The fetus and the law-Whose life is it anyway? MS. (Sept. 1984), 62:134–5.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Bowes, W. A., and Salgestad, B., Fetal v. maternal rights: Medical and legal perspectives, Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 58:209(1981).

    Google Scholar 

  44. Raleigh Fitkin-Paul Morgan Memorial Hospital v. Anderson ,201 A.2d 537, 538 (N.J. 1964).

    Google Scholar 

  45. Application of the President and Directors of Georgetown College ,331 F. 2d 1000 (1964).

    Google Scholar 

  46. It has also been noted that surgery will, of course, not always be successful and may lead to salvaging a fetus with a “dismal” prospect for whom the parents will be responsible. Ruddick, W., and Wilcox, W., Operating on the fetus, Hastings Cent. Rep. (Oct. 1982), at 10–14.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Hubbard, R., Legal and policy implications of recent advances in prenatal diagnosis and fetal therapy, Women’s Rights Law Reporter 7:201, 216 (1982).

    Google Scholar 

  48. Such suits may, however, make sense if confined to cases in which the mother has given the child up for adoption or has relinquished her parental rights.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Boston University Schools of Medicine and Public Health, 80 East Concord Street, Boston, MA, 02118, USA

    George J. Annas J.D., M.P.H. (Edward Utley Professor of Health Law)

  2. Clinical Genetics Services, Prentice Women’s Hospital and Maternity Center, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA

    Sherman Elias (Director, Associate Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology)

  3. Northwestern University Medical School, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA

    Sherman Elias (Director, Associate Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology)

Authors
  1. George J. Annas J.D., M.P.H.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sherman Elias
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Human Genetics, Boston University School of Medicine, 80 East Concord Street, Boston, Massachusetts, 02118, USA

    Aubrey Milunsky MB.B.Ch., D.Sc., F.R.C.P, D.C.H. (Professor of Pediatrics, Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Pathology, Director) (Professor of Pediatrics, Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Pathology, Director)

  2. Health Law Section, Boston University Schools of Medicine and Public Health, 80 East Concord Street, Boston, Massachusetts, 02118, USA

    George J. Annas J.D., M.P.H. (Edward Utley Professor of Health Law Chief) (Edward Utley Professor of Health Law Chief)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1984 George J. Annas and Sherman Elias

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Annas, G.J., Elias, S. (1984). Perspectives on Fetal Surgery. In: Milunsky, A., Annas, G.J. (eds) Genetics and the Law III. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-4952-5_25

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-4952-5_25

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4684-4954-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4684-4952-5

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation