Unlabelled: Nearly 20 years ago the EURONIC study reported that French neonatologists sometimes deemed it legitimate to terminate the lives of newborn infants when the prognosis appeared extremely poor. Parents were not always informed of these decisions. Major change has occurred since then and is described herein.
Material And Methods: A survey was conducted in the Île-de-France region, from 1 January to 31 January 2016. Professionals from 15 neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) were invited to complete a questionnaire.
Results: A total of 702 questionnaires were collected and 670 responses were analyzed. Knowledge of the law differed according to professional status, with 71% of MDs (medical staff, MS), compared with 28% of nonmedical staff (NMS) declaring that they had good knowledge of the law. Most MDs and NMS believed that withholding or withdrawing life-sustaining treatments (WWLST) could be decided and implemented after a delay. Half of them thought that WWLST would always result in death. Although required by law, a consulting MD attended the collegial meeting required before deciding on WWLST in only half of the cases. Parents were almost always informed of the decision thereafter by the physician in charge of their infant. The most frequent disagreement with parents was observed when WWLST was the option selected. In this case, most professionals suggested postponing WWLST, continuing intensive care and dialogue with parents, aiming at a final shared decision. Major differences were observed between NICUs with regard to the withdrawal of artificial nutrition and hydration. Finally, 14% of MDs declared that infant active terminations of life still occurred in their NICU. Major differences concern WWLST and active termination of life, whose meaning has been partly modified since 2001.
Conclusion: Several major changes were observed in this survey: (1) treatment withdrawal decisions are made today in agreement with the law; (2) parents' information and involvement in the decision process have profoundly changed; (3) active termination of life (euthanasia) very rarely occurs; only at the end of a process in accordance with ethical principles and within the law is this decision made.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.arcped.2019.06.007 | DOI Listing |
J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs
January 2020
Objective: To examine how clinical decisions are made at the end of life for infants born with specific fatal and disabling conditions in NICUs in Jordan from the perspectives of neonatal health care providers.
Design: A cross-sectional survey of neonatal nurses and physicians.
Setting: Twenty-four NICUs in Jordan.
Arch Pediatr
September 2019
Université Paris Descartes, 12, rue de l'École de Médecine, 75006 Paris, France.
Unlabelled: Nearly 20 years ago the EURONIC study reported that French neonatologists sometimes deemed it legitimate to terminate the lives of newborn infants when the prognosis appeared extremely poor. Parents were not always informed of these decisions. Major change has occurred since then and is described herein.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJ Pediatr
April 2019
Department of Neonatology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Objective: To assess changes in attitudes of neonatologists regarding the care of extremely preterm infants and parental involvement over the last 20 years.
Study Design: Internet-based survey (2016) involving 170 tertiary neonatal intensive care units in Austria, Switzerland, and Germany using the European Project on Parents' Information and Ethical Decision Making in Neonatal Intensive Care Units questionnaire (German edition) with minor modifications to the original survey from 1996 to 1997.
Results: The 2016 survey included 104 respondents (52.
Ann Ist Super Sanita
January 2012
Fondazione Maruzza Lefebvre D'Ovidio Onlus, Rome, Italy.
Recent progress in neonatal care have significantly improved the prognosis and chances of survival of critically ill or extremely preterm neonates and have modified the limits of viability. However, in some circumstances, when the child's death can only be briefly postponed at the price of severe suffering, or when survival is associated with severe disabilities and an intolerable life for the child and his/her parents, the application of the full armamentarium of modern neonatal intensive care may not be appropriate. In such circumstances the limitation of intensive treatments (withholding or withdrawing) and shift towards palliative care, can represent a more humane and reasonable alternative.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJ Med Ethics
April 2011
INSERM U 953, 16 avenue Paul Vaillant-Couturier, 94807 Villejuif Cedex, France.
Objectives: A statute enacted in 2005 modified the legislative framework of the rights of terminally ill persons in France. Ten years after the EURONIC study, which described the self-reported practices of neonatal caregivers towards ethical decision-making, a new study was conducted to assess the impact of the new law in neonatal intensive care units (NICU) and compare the results reported by EURONIC with current practices.
Setting And Design: The study was carried out in the same two NICU as in the EURONIC qualitative study.
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!