Register for email alerts and news feeds:
This journal | BMJ Group
rss
Archives of Disease in Childhood - Fetal and Neonatal Edition 2001;85:F4-F7; doi:10.1136/fn.85.1.F4
Copyright © 2001 BMJ Publishing Group Ltd & Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health.
Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 2001;85:F4-F7 ( July )

Consent to autopsy for neonates

H E McHaffiea, P W Fowlieb, R Humec, I A Laingd, D J Lloyde, A J Lyond

a Medical Ethics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, b Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, Dundee, Scotland, UK, c Department of Developmental Medicine, University of Dundee, d Simpson Memorial Maternity Pavilion, Edinburgh, e Aberdeen Maternity Hospital, Aberdeen, Scotland, UK

Correspondence to: Dr McHaffie, 12 Mayburn Terrace, Loanhead, Midlothian EH20 9EJ, Scotland, UK hazel{at}mchaffie.f9.co.uk

Accepted 13 December 2000

OBJECTIVES---To determine parents' views on autopsy after treatment withdrawal.
DESIGN---Face to face interviews with 59 sets of bereaved parents (108 individual parents) for whose 62 babies there had been discussion of treatment withdrawal.
RESULTS---All except one couple were asked for permission for postmortem examination; 38% refused. The main reasons for declining were concerns about disfigurement, a wish to have the child left in peace, and a feeling that an autopsy was unnecessary because the parents had no unanswered questions. The diagnosis, the age of the child, and the approach of the consultant appeared to influence consent rates. Of those who agreed to autopsies, 92% were given the results by the neonatologist concerned. Whether or not they had agreed to the procedure, at 13 months no parent expressed regrets about their decision.
CONCLUSIONS---Autopsy rates in the East of Scotland stand at 62%. Parents' perceptions are an important element in consent to postmortem examination.


Keywords: autopsy; withdrawal of treatment; consent


© 2001 by Archives of Disease in Childhood

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

  • Rose, C, Evans, M, Tooley, J (2006). Falling rates of perinatal postmortem examination: are we to blame?. Arch. Dis. Child. Fetal Neonatal Ed. 91: F465-F465 [Full Text]  
  • Snowdon, C, Elbourne, D R, Garcia, J (2004). Perinatal pathology in the context of a clinical trial: a review of the literature. Arch. Dis. Child. Fetal Neonatal Ed. 89: F200-F203 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Rankin, J., Wright, C., Lind, T. (2002). Cross sectional survey of parents' experience and views of the postmortem examination. BMJ 324: 816-818 [Abstract] [Full Text]  

This Article

Services
Citing Articles
Google Scholar
PubMed
Bookmark with

Register for free content

The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.

Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.

Latest from ADC

 

ADC is co-owned by the RCPCH and is the official journal of the European Academy of Paediatrics

BMJ Careers - Latest Paediatrics and Paediatric Surgery Jobs

Paediatrics and Paediatric Surgery Jobs