IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/clnure/v5y1996i1p81-96.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Couples' Evaluations of Foreknowledge of Fetal Impairment

Author

Listed:
  • Margarete Sandelowski

    (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill)

  • Linda Corson Jones

    (Louisiana State University Medical Center)

Abstract

The Western cultural presumption that knowledge is a right and a good is integral to current discussions of prenatal diagnosis. Little is known, however, about how couples obtaining positive fetal diagnoses evaluate this knowledge for their own lives and whether or how, they are advantaged in relation to couples learning about their baby's impairment after birth. Findings from 40 Interviews with expectant parents obtaining positive prenatal diagnoses suggest that couples both value and question the value of fetal foreknowledge and that this knowledge temporally relocates, rather than substantively alters, parental responses and infant outcomes.

Suggested Citation

  • Margarete Sandelowski & Linda Corson Jones, 1996. "Couples' Evaluations of Foreknowledge of Fetal Impairment," Clinical Nursing Research, , vol. 5(1), pages 81-96, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:clnure:v:5:y:1996:i:1:p:81-96
    DOI: 10.1177/105477389600500107
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/105477389600500107
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/105477389600500107?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mooney, Gavin & Lange, Mette, 1993. "Ante-natal screening: What constitutes 'benefit'?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 37(7), pages 873-878, October.
    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. Coast, Joanna, 2018. "A history that goes hand in hand: Reflections on the development of health economics and the role played by Social Science & Medicine, 1967–2017," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 196(C), pages 227-232.
    2. Valerie Seror, 2008. "Fitting observed and theoretical choices – women's choices about prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(5), pages 557-577, May.
    3. Ryan, Mandy & Netten, Ann & Skatun, Diane & Smith, Paul, 2006. "Using discrete choice experiments to estimate a preference-based measure of outcome--An application to social care for older people," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 927-944, September.
    4. Kirsten Howard & Glenn Salkeld & Kirsten McCaffery & Les Irwig, 2008. "HPV triage testing or repeat Pap smear for the management of atypical squamous cells (ASCUS) on Pap smear: is there evidence of process utility?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(5), pages 593-605, May.
    5. Shackley, Phil & Cairns, John, 1996. "Evaluating the benefits of antenatal screening: an alternative approach," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 103-115, May.
    6. Hall, Jane & Fiebig, Denzil G. & King, Madeleine T. & Hossain, Ishrat & Louviere, Jordan J., 2006. "What influences participation in genetic carrier testing?: Results from a discrete choice experiment," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 520-537, May.
    7. Wiseman, Virginia, 1997. "Caring: the neglected health outcome? or input?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 43-53, January.
    8. Katherine Payne & Marion McAllister & Linda M. Davies, 2013. "Valuing The Economic Benefits Of Complex Interventions: When Maximising Health Is Not Sufficient," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(3), pages 258-271, March.
    9. Stephen Birch & Joy Melnikow & Miriam Kuppermann, 2003. "Conservative versus aggressive follow up of mildly abnormal Pap smears: Testing for process utility," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(10), pages 879-884, October.
    10. Mandy Ryan, 1996. "Using Consumer Preferences in Health Care Decision Making: The Application of Conjoint Analysis," Monograph 000420, Office of Health Economics.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:sae:clnure:v:5:y:1996:i:1:p:81-96. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.