Abstract
<h3>To the Editor.—</h3> The Board of Trustees of the American Medical Association<sup>1</sup>should be congratulated for addressing the important and controversial topic of legal interventions during pregnancy. We agree with the board's opposition to the use of criminal law to penalize women for substance or alcohol abuse during pregnancy. We could also agree that many court orders have been inappropriate, such as the Angela Carder case.<sup>2</sup>We believe that preventive ethics strategies can obviate the need for a court order in most cases.<sup>3</sup> We disagree, however, with the board's analysis and arguments concerning court-ordered intervention during the intrapartum period. The board understands court-ordered interventions on pregnant women to involve, in most cases, (1) increased risks of morbidity and mortality for pregnant women, ie, those risks associated with cesarean delivery; and (2) physical invasion of the pregnant woman's person, in violation of her right to refuse bodily invasion
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
