IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v98y2013icp330-339.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bioethics in practice: Addressing ethically sensitive requests in a Dutch fertility clinic

Author

Listed:
  • Gerrits, Trudie
  • Reis, Ria
  • Braat, Didi, D.M.
  • Kremer, Jan, A.M.
  • Hardon, Anita, P.

Abstract

This article provides insight into how ethically sensitive requests for the use of assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs) are dealt within the daily practice of a Dutch fertility clinic. The findings presented are part of an ethnographic study conducted in this clinic from September 2003 until April 2005. Information for this article was gathered by attending the multidisciplinary ethics meetings and conversations with clinic staff. By looking at ‘bioethics in practice’, this article provides insight into the complex and dynamic interplay between particular couples' situations, contextual features, bioethical principles, doctors' subjective feelings and views, and the employment of medical practices. Our study suggests that personal views to a certain extent inform the agenda of the ethics meetings, but in the end neither these views nor bioethical principles fully determine the decisions made. Clinic staff members employ routine medical practices with the intention to carefully resolve ethically sensitive cases. These practices include: collegial consultation, searching for scientific evidence in the literature, obtaining more medical information, offering medical tests, referring couples to other clinics and ensuring informed consent. Rather than examining hypothetical cases, which evoke principles, observations of practices regarding real life cases of which many details are known, allowed us to identify the influence of routine medical practice on ethical decisions. Despite initial concerns from the side of the medical professionals (some of which might be regarded as paternalistic), at the end the reproductive autonomy of most couples seeking ARTs was not jeopardized. The format of the multidisciplinary ethics meetings seems to be promising as it provides a space for clinic staff members to express and reflect on their subjective views and feelings of unease regarding certain requests for ARTs, while at the same time it diminishes the risk that decision making is (too heavily) shaped by these feelings and views.

Suggested Citation

  • Gerrits, Trudie & Reis, Ria & Braat, Didi, D.M. & Kremer, Jan, A.M. & Hardon, Anita, P., 2013. "Bioethics in practice: Addressing ethically sensitive requests in a Dutch fertility clinic," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 330-339.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:98:y:2013:i:c:p:330-339
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.12.031
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953613000543
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.12.031?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vermeulen, Eric, 2004. "Dealing with doubt: Making decisions in a neonatal ward in The Netherlands," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 59(10), pages 2071-2085, November.
    2. Hoffmaster, Barry, 1992. "Can ethnography save the life of medical ethics?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 35(12), pages 1421-1431, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Petersen, Alan, 2013. "From bioethics to a sociology of bio-knowledge," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 264-270.
    2. Huniche, Lotte, 2011. "Moral landscapes and everyday life in families with Huntington's disease: Aligning ethnographic description and bioethics," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(11), pages 1810-1816, June.
    3. Janet Green & Philip Darbyshire & Anne Adams & Debra Jackson, 2015. "Balancing hope with reality: how neonatal nurses manage the uncertainty of caring for extremely premature babies," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(17-18), pages 2410-2418, September.
    4. Kok, Niek & Hoedemaekers, Cornelia & Fuchs, Malaika & van der Hoeven, Hans & Zegers, Marieke & van Gurp, Jelle, 2024. "Evaluating the use of casuistry during moral case deliberation in the ICU: A multiple qualitative case study," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 345(C).
    5. Kathy Charmaz & Virginia Olesen, 1997. "Ethnographic Research in Medical Sociology," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 25(4), pages 452-494, May.
    6. Molyneux, C.S. & Wassenaar, D.R. & Peshu, N. & Marsh, K., 2005. "'Even if they ask you to stand by a tree all day, you will have to do it (laughter)...!': Community voices on the notion and practice of informed consent for biomedical research in developing countrie," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 443-454, July.
    7. Payot, Antoine & Gendron, Sylvie & Lefebvre, Francine & Doucet, Hubert, 2007. "Deciding to resuscitate extremely premature babies: How do parents and neonatologists engage in the decision?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 64(7), pages 1487-1500, April.
    8. Parker, Michael, 2007. "Ethnography/ethics," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 65(11), pages 2248-2259, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:98:y:2013:i:c:p:330-339. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.