• Howard Minkoff.
• Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Maimonides Medical Center, SUNY Downstate, Brooklyn, NY 11219, USA. hminkoff@maimonidesmed.org
• Semin. Perinatol. 2006 Oct 1;30(5):309-12.

AbstractIn responding to patient requests for cesarean section, physicians must consider ethical principles. Obstetricians have autonomy and beneficence-based obligations to the mother, and the mother and the obstetrician have beneficence-based obligations to the fetus. Maternal autonomy is usually accepted as the most compelling ethical canon. However, the physician has a right to refuse requests. Thus, when a patient requests surgery, the physician may attempt to dissuade her and failing that either acquiesce or, feeling that professional conscience would not allow him/her to honor that request, refuse. Which choice is made should reflect the provider's believe about the strength of the supporting data. Given the need to recognize patient autonomy, to respect patient values even as one tries to motivate patients to work toward the highest health values, and to acknowledge women's primacy as fetal champions, a physician should be loathe to refuse unless the data regarding cesarean section by choice are wholly tilted away from maternal-child interests. If the data are in the realm of equipoise, even if not at the tipping point, discussing options, attempting to dissuade patients but ultimately acquiescing to their judgment would not be incompatible with obstetrical ethics.

15 keywords...

hide…