PEDIATRICS Vol. 75 No. 6 June 1985, pp. 1119
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow P3Rs: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when P3Rs are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Student,
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Student,

PARENTS' RIGHT TO DECIDE

Student

Dave and Debbie Bailey, a couple in Orange, Calif., were given 45 minutes to decide the fate of the 20-ounce infant that had just been born to them 16 weeks prematurely. Knowing that most such infants die eventually, and that half of the survivors suffer some handicap, they tearfully resolved to let nature take its course. But their doctor obtained a court order to continue treatment to keep the infant alive at any cost. As Andrew Malcolm of The Times reported, the hospital's ethics committee backed the doctor in every respect except allowing the parents to believe their choice would be decisive. . . .

No baboon heart could have been implanted in Baby Fae if her parents had denied consent. Why should not the Baileys have had the same veto over the rescue of their child? . . . Like Procrustes, who stretched or cut his guests to fit a single-size bed, public policy seems to accord all infants an absolute right to life, not just by divine will but by all conceivable medical heroics. Parents can be given too much choice, but none at all seems too little.