They told me I had a baby girl. I started to cry. I wanted to hold her. That was what was supposed to happen. But they said no. And then they put me to sleep. So began the ordeal of Mr. and Mrs. A, and of their daughter, known only as Baby Jane Doe (New York Times, November 6, 1983). For Baby Jane Doe was born with spina bifida and associated defects, and her parents decided to forego corrective surgery, which, they felt, would only prolong a life of pain and suffering. While thousands of parents every year hear the sorrowful news that their newborn baby has a serious illness or some physical or mental disability, and have to make painful decisions concerning treatment for the infant, the case of Baby Jane Doe has become the occasion for a public debate about the care of all such babies. The ethical dimensions of this problem have been discussedfor at least a decade. While there is no resolution, a moderate consensus is emerging, expressed in the President's Commission 1983 report Deciding to Forego Life-Sustaining Treatment: Parents should be the surrogates for a seriously ill newborn unless they are disqualified by decisionmaking incapacity, an unresolvable disagreement between them, or their choice of a course of action that is clearly against the infant's best interests. Not everyone accepts this principle; some believe either that parents' or other family members' interests should sometimes (or always) outweigh those of the infant, or that treatment should always be mandated, no matter what the infant's condition. Yet even those who do accept the principle that the infant's best interests should prevail have difficulty in applying it to specific cases. The two articles that follow illustrate why. Much of the controversy about whether Baby Jane Doe should have had surgery turns on a judgment about her medical prognosis. Anthony Gallo explains in general terms and Bonnie Steinbock describes in the case of Baby Jane Doe how widely that prognosis can vary in spina bifida. Medical management depends partly on the severity of defects in a particular infant, but also on the physician's philosophy of treatment, knowledge of the latest technology, and presentation of the probable disabilities to parents. Physicians communicate to parents not only their medical judgments but also their interpretation of what the disabilities will mean to the life of the child and to the family. Moreover, when parents' decisions are challenged, as they were in the Baby Jane Doe case, the legal system becomes the locus for the discussion. Yet, as the President' s Commission pointed out, Judicial
Read full abstract