Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ethical Concepts in Neonatal Palliative Care

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Neonatal Palliative Care for Nurses

Abstract

Demystifying clinical ethics and the most fundamental ethical concepts and issues that arise when caring for babies is important and meaningful to nursing professionals, as nurses experience complex ethical issues on a daily basis. A consideration of key ethical principles such as beneficence, justice and parental autonomy as well as key concepts such as a baby’s interests, quality of life, shared decision-making, and patient- and family-centred care provides a strong basis for better understanding and dealing with complex clinical situations. The utility of clinical ethics decision-making frameworks, which aim to assist with difficult decisions in the clinical context, is also briefly discussed. These ethics fundamentals are discussed in an easily digestible manner and aim to provide the springboard for further consideration of the issues raised. A case is considered in depth to illustrate the ethical challenges of clinical decision-making relating to withholding/withdrawing life-sustaining treatments as well as the specific issues and considerations underlying decisions made in this case. The chapter points to the important connections between ethics, communication and decision-making and concludes with a consideration of the impact of the media and social media in highly publicised medical cases.

Chapters 6 and 7 are interrelated; this chapter covers the ethical concepts of neonatal palliative care, and Chapter 7 presents the legal issues.

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 EPUB and 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
Hardcover Book
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover 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

Notes

  1. 1.

    See Jameton, A. (1984) for the distinction between these concepts.

References

  • Beauchamp TL, Childress JF (2013) Principles of biomedical ethics. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Birchley G (2013) Deciding together? Best interests and shared decision-making in paediatric intensive care. Health Care Anal 22:203–222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birchley G, Gooberman-Hill R, Deans Z, Fraser J, Huxtable R (2017) ‘Best interests’ in paediatric intensive care: an empirical ethics study. Arch Dis Child 102:930–935

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colver A, Rapp M, Eisemann N, Ehlinger V, Thyen U, Dickinson HO, Parkes J, Parkinson K, Nystrand M, Fauconnier J, Marcelli M, Michelsen SI, Arnaud C (2015) Self-reported quality of life of adolescents with cerebral palsy: a cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis. Lancet 385:705–716

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diekema D (2004) Parental refusals of medical treatment: the harm principle as threshold for state intervention. Theor Med Bioeth 25:243–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diekema DS (2011) Revisiting the best interest standard: uses and misuses. J Clin Ethics 22:128–133

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Feinberg J (1984) Harm to others: the moral limits of the criminal law. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Feltman DM, Du H, Leuthner SR (2012) Survey of neonatologists/’ attitudes toward limiting life-sustaining treatments in the neonatal intensive care unit. J Perinatol 32:886–892

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gillam L (2016) The zone of parental discretion: an ethical tool for dealing with disagreement between parents and doctors about medical treatment for a child. Clin Ethics 11:1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gillam L, Wilkinson D, Xafis V, Isaacs D (2017) Decision-making at the borderline of viability: who should decide and on what basis? J Paediatr Child Health 53:105–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harding E, Wait S, Scrutton J (2015) The state of play in person-centred care: a pragmatic review of how person-centred care is defined, applied and measured, featuring selected key contributors and case studies across the field. Health Policy Partnership, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodgson J, Pitt P, Metcalfe S, Halliday J, Menezes M, Fisher J, Hickerton C, Petersen K, Mcclaren B (2016) Experiences of prenatal diagnosis and decision-making about termination of pregnancy: a qualitative study. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 56:605–613

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmann TC, Légaré F, Simmons MB, Mcnamara K, Mccaffery K, Trevena LJ, Hudson B, Glasziou PP, Del Mar CB (2014) Shared decision making: what do clinicians need to know and why should they bother? Med J Aust 201:513–514

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jameton A (1984) Nursing practice: the ethical issues. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson B, Abraham M, Conway J, Simmons L, Edgman-Levitan S, Sodomka P, Schlucter J, Ford D (2008) Partnering with patients and families to design a patient and family-centered health care system: recommendations and promising practices. Institute for Patient- and Family-Centered Care in Collaboration with Institute for Healthcare Improvement, Bethesda

    Google Scholar 

  • Kopelman LM (2007) The best interests standard for incompetent or incapacitated persons of all ages. J Law Med Ethics 35:187–196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kopelman LM (2013) Using the best interests standard to generate actual duties. AJOB Prim Res 4:11–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lachman VD (2016) Ethics, law, and policy. Moral resilience: managing and preventing moral distress and moral residue. Medsurg Nurs 25:121–124

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Larcher V, Craig F, Bhogal K, Wilkinson D, Brierley J, Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (2015) Making decisions to limit treatment in life-limiting and life-threatening conditions in children: a framework for practice. Arch Dis Child 100:S1–S23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laventhal N, Verhagen AAE, Hansen TWR, Dempsey E, Davis PG, Musante GA, Wiles A, Meadow W, Janvier A (2017) International variations in application of the best-interest standard across the age spectrum. J Perinatol 37:208–213

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lisy K, Peters MDJ, Riitano D, Jordan Z, Aromataris E (2016) Provision of meaningful care at diagnosis, birth, and after stillbirth: a qualitative synthesis of parents’ experiences. Birth 43:6–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mill JS (1993) On liberty. In: On liberty and utilitarianism. Bantam Dell, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (7 December 2016) Nice guideline: end of life care for infants, children and young people with life-limiting conditions: planning and management. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence

    Google Scholar 

  • Nuffield Council on Bioethics (2013) Communication of research and the media. In: Novel neurotechnologies: intervening in the brain. Nuffield Council on Bioethics, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Regional Ethics Program (2013) The idea: ethical decision-making framework. Trillium Health Partners. https://trilliumhealthpartners.ca/aboutus/Documents/IDEA-Framework-THP.pdf

  • Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (2010) Termination of pregnancy for fetal abnormality in England, Scotland and Wales: report of a working party. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (2011) The care of women requesting induced abortion: evidence-based clinical guideline number 7. RCOG Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Royal College of Physicians and British Society of Gastroenterology (2010) Oral feeding difficulties and dilemmas: a guide to practical care, particularly towards the end of life. Royal College of Physicians, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson D (2013) Death or disability?: the ‘Carmentis Machine’ and decision-making for critically ill children. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Xafis V (2017) Overruling parental decisions in paediatric medicine: a comparison of Diekema’s Harm Threshold Framework and the Zone of Parental Discretion Framework. Clinical Ethics. First Published Online 4 Aug 2017. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477750917724328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xafis V, Wilkinson D, Sullivan J (2015) What information do parents need when facing end-of-life decisions for their child? A meta-synthesis of parental feedback. BMC Palliat Care 14:1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xafis V, Watkins A, Wilkinson D (2016) Death talk: basic linguistic rules and communication in perinatal and paediatric end-of-life discussions. Patient Educ Couns 99:555–561

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Clinical Governance and Medical Administration at The Children’s Hospitals at Westmead/Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia

    Vicki Xafis

  2. Centre for Biomedical Ethics, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore

    Vicki Xafis

  3. Children and Young People’s Palliative Care, Helen and Douglas House, Oxford, UK

    Karen Brombley

Authors
  1. Vicki Xafis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Karen Brombley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vicki Xafis .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Pan London Lead Nurse, Neonatal Palliative Care, The True Colours Trust CW+ and Chelsea and Westminster Foundation Trust, London, UK

    Alexandra Mancini

  2. Faculty of Health, Social Care and Education, Kingston University and St. George’s University London, London, UK

    Jayne Price

  3. WellChild Nurse Specialist, Louis Dundas Centre for Children’s Palliative Care, Great Ormond Street Hospital, London, UK

    Tara Kerr-Elliott

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Xafis, V., Brombley, K. (2020). Ethical Concepts in Neonatal Palliative Care. In: Mancini, A., Price, J., Kerr-Elliott, T. (eds) Neonatal Palliative Care for Nurses. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31877-2_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31877-2_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-31876-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-31877-2

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation