BABY DOE VAKASI ÖZELİNDE ENGELLİ YENİDOĞANLARA DAİR ETİK SORUNLARIN TARİHİ

Yıl 2018, , 15 - 40, 31.01.2018

Ceren Gülser İlikan Rasimoğlu

https://doi.org/10.21550/sosbilder.330614

Öz

Bu makale engelli
yenidoğanların yaşam haklarına ilişkin ABD’de ortaya çıkan etik tartışmaları ve
bu tartışmaların hukuk alanındaki karşılıklarını tarihselleştirmektedir.
1970’li yıllardan önce yenidoğanların tedavileri ve engelli yenidoğanlarla
ilgili alınacak tıbbi kararlar, özel alanın bir parçası kabul edilerek aile ve
hekimlerin inisiyatifine teslim edilmişken; bu tarihten itibaren siyasal
ortamın değişmesi, kişi haklarına yönelik tartışmaların zenginleşmesi ve sağlık
teknolojisinin gelişmesiyle beraber yenidoğan uzmanları ve yasa koyucular da ne
yapabileceklerini ve ne yapmaları gerektiği üzerinde düşünmeye başlamışlardır.
1980’li yıllara gelindiğinde; Baby Doe ve Baby Jane Doe olarak adlandırılan ve
ağır engellerle doğan iki bebeğin yaşam hakkına yönelik ortaya atılan fikirler
CAPTA adı verilen çocuk istismarını önleme yasasını beraberinde getirmiştir. Bu
yasaya göre yenidoğanın yaşam hakkı savunulmuş ve bunun istisnaları
belirlenmiştir. Böylelikle “boşuna tedavi” kavramı tıp hukukunun ve etiğinin
önemli bir parçası haline gelmiş ve tıbbi karar almanın belirleyici unsuru
olmuştur. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

Tıp etiği, Baby Doe Vakası, Yaşam hakkı, Boşuna tedavi, en yüksek fayda ilkesi

The Case of Baby Doe and the Hıstory of Ethical Questions on Disabled Newborns

Öz

This article reviews ethical debates in the U.S.
concerning the right to life of newborns with disabilities and the appertaining
legal debates. While medical treatments for newborns and newborns with
disabilities were considered to be part of the private field and handed over to
the initiative of the family and physicians prior to the 1970s; from this date
on, with the change of the political environment, the enrichment of the debate
on the rights of individuals, and the development of health technology, professionals
of the domain of neonatology as well as legislators have begun to think about
what they should do, as well as what they can do. With the 1980s, the ideas
rose about the right to life of two babies, known as Baby Doe and Baby Jane
Doe, born with severe disabilities, brought with it the law on the prevention
of child abuse, called CAPTA. With this law, the right to life of the newborn
has been defended and exceptions have been determined. Thus, the concept of
"futile treatment" has become an important part of medical law and
ethics, and has become a decisive factor in medical decision-making.

Anahtar Kelimeler

medical ethics, Baby Doe case, right to life, futile treatment, best interest principle

Kaynakça

• http://www.cincinnatirighttolife.org/life-issues/infanticide/baby-doe,Erişim: 8.06.2014 http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/john-doe, Erişim: 19.06.2017. https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/john-doe, Erişim: 19.06.2017. Annas; George J. (1984a). “The Baby Doe Regulations: Governmental Intervention in Neonatal Rescue Medicine”. American Journal of Public Health. C. 74, S.6, s. 618-620. Annas; George J. (1984b). “The Case of Baby Jane Doe: Child Abuse or Unlawful Federal Intervention?”, American Journal of Public Health. C. 74, S. 7, s. 727-729. Bhatia, Jatinder. (2008). “Baby Doe: Does it Really Apply Now? Palliative Care of the Ill Neonate”, Georgia State University Law Review. C. 25, S. 4, s. 901-908. Clark, Frank (2005). “Baby Doe Rules Have Been Interpreted and Applied by an Appellate Court”, Pediatrics. S. 116, s. e513-e515. Conway, Craig A. (2008). “Baby Doe and Beyond: Examining the Practical and Philosophical Influences Impacting Medical Decision-Making on Behalf of Marginally-Viable Newborns”, Georgia State University Law Review. C. 25, S. 4, s. 1097-1175. Crossley, Mary (2008). “Rescuing Baby Doe”, Georgia State University Law Review. C. 25, S. 4, s. 1043-1059. Kopelman, Loretta M. (2008). “Why the Capta’s Baby Doe Rules Should Be Rejected in Favor of the Best Interests Standard”, Georgia State University Law Review. C. 25, S. 4, s. 909-930. Lang; Garcy C. (1985). “‘Baby Doe’”- A Medical Ethical Issue”, The Western Journal of Medicine. C. 142, S. 6, s. 837-841. Orfali; Kristina (2004). “Parental Role in Medical Decision-Making: Fact or Fiction? A Comparative Study of Ethical Dilemmas in French and American Neonatal Intensive Care Units”, Social Science & Medicine. C. 58, s. 2009-2022. Paris, John J. vd. (1997). “Ethical and Legal Issues in Intensive Care”, Journal of Intensive Care Medicine. C. 12, S. 6, s. 298-309. Paris, John J. vd. (2007). “Parental Refusal of Medical Treatment for A Newborn”, Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics. C. 28, s. 427-441. Placencia, Frank X. Ve Laurence McCullough (2011). “The History of Ethical Decision Making in Neonatal Intensive Care”, Journal of Intensive Care Medicine; C. 26, S. 6, s. 368-384. Resnik, Jack (2011). “The Baby Doe Rules (1984); The Embryo Project Encyclopedia”, Arizona State University School of Life Sciences Center for Biology and Society. Sayeed, Sadath A. (2005). “Bay Doe Redux? The Department of Health and Human Services and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002: A Cautionary Note on Normative Neonatal Practice”, Pediatrics. C. 116, S. 4, s. e576-e586. Silvers, Anita (2008). “Playing God with Baby Doe: Quality of Life and Unpredictable Life Standards at the Start of Life”, Georgia State University Law Review. C. 25, S. 4, s. 1061-1095. Scott, Charity (2008). “Baby Doe at Twenty Five”, Georgia State University Law Review, C. 25, s. 4, s. 801-833. White, Michael (2011). “The End at the Beginning”, The Ochsner Journal, C. 11, S. 4, s. 309-316.