{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,23]],"date-time":"2026-08-23T17:32:44Z","timestamp":1787506364704,"version":"build-2736575974"},"reference-count":26,"publisher":"Wiley","issue":"1","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2011,8,11]],"date-time":"2011-08-11T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1313020800000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"http:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/termsAndConditions#vor"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Intl J Gynecology &amp; Obste"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2011,10]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:label\/>\n                    <jats:p>Recent research in the USA has shown the advantages for children's welfare of open fetal surgery over postnatal treatment for myelomeningocele. However, a balance must be struck between complications of premature birth risked by prenatal surgery and the long\u2010term advantages for affected children's health, including mobility and neurologic capacity. Risks for women are repeated surgery for intervention and delivery. The research raises legal and ethical questions about how fetal interests should influence women's choices, and whether women may decline interventions in their pregnancies that offer their children lifelong advantages. Beyond fetal interests and women's preferences are state interests in fetal life, which in the USA and elsewhere have been expressed in judicially authorized cesarean deliveries. Underlying issues are the nature of fetal interests; contrasting entitlements to care from their mothers of fetuses and born children; healthcare providers\u2019 responsibilities toward fetuses; and duties of care, information, and advice to pregnant women.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ijgo.2011.07.007","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2011,8,15]],"date-time":"2011-08-15T00:37:42Z","timestamp":1313368662000},"page":"80-83","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":19,"title":["Legal and ethical issues in fetal surgery"],"prefix":"10.1002","volume":"115","author":[{"given":"Bernard M.","family":"Dickens","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Rebecca J.","family":"Cook","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"311","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2011,8,11]]},"reference":[{"key":"e_1_2_7_2_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMoa1014379"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_3_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMe1101228"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_4_2","unstructured":"Belluck P. Risk and reward in utero. New York Times February 13 2011 Week in Review. p. 5."},{"key":"e_1_2_7_5_2","unstructured":"Belluck P. Fetal surgery gains support. New York Times February 10 2011. p. 5A."},{"key":"e_1_2_7_6_2","unstructured":"Vo v France (2005) 10 European Human Rights Reports12 (European Court of Human Rights)."},{"key":"e_1_2_7_7_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","DOI":"10.1093\/oso\/9780195054941.001.0001","volume-title":"Life Before Birth: the Moral and Legal Status of Embryos and Fetuses","author":"Steinbock B.","year":"1992"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_8_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S0020-7292(03)00320-5"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_9_2","unstructured":"Dobson (Litigation Guardian of) v. Dobson (1999) 174 Dominion Law Reports (4th) 1 (Supreme Court of Canada)."},{"key":"e_1_2_7_10_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S0095-5108(03)00046-0"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_11_2","unstructured":"RR v Poland Case 27617\/04 Judgment 26 May 2011(European Court of Human Rights Fourth Section)."},{"key":"e_1_2_7_12_2","unstructured":"Columbia Broadcasting System (CBS) Evening News June 6 2008. The girl who was \u201cborn\u201d twice: a medical miracle saves a baby's life from life\u2010threatening tumor."},{"key":"e_1_2_7_13_2","unstructured":"Roe v Wade (1973). Supreme Court Reporter 93(8) 705."},{"key":"e_1_2_7_14_2","unstructured":"St. George's Healthcare NHS Trust v S (Guidelines) R. v Collins ex p S (No.2) [1999] Family Reports 26 (Court of Appeal)."},{"key":"e_1_2_7_15_2","unstructured":"Winnipeg Child and Family Services (Northwest Area) v. G (DF) (1997) 152 Dominion Law Reports (4th) 193 (Supreme Court of Canada)."},{"key":"e_1_2_7_16_2","unstructured":"In Re AC (1990) 573 Atlantic Reporter (2d) 1235 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals en banc)."},{"key":"e_1_2_7_17_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1748-720X.2010.00502.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_18_2","unstructured":"Portal de Belen v Ministerio de Salud y Accion Social de la Nacion 5\u20103\u20102002 Fallos 325:292 (Supreme Court of Argentina)."},{"key":"e_1_2_7_19_2","unstructured":"Re F (in utero) [1988] 2 All England Reports 193 (Court of Appeal)."},{"key":"e_1_2_7_20_2","unstructured":"American Civil Liberties Union. Kentucky court blocks unconstitutional prosecutions of pregnant women (Cochran v Commonwealth Kentucky Supreme Court Case No. 2008 \u2010 SC\u2010 000095\u2010 DG) June 17 2010."},{"key":"e_1_2_7_21_2","unstructured":"Re MB (Medical Treatment) [1997] 2 Family Law Reports 426 (English Court of Appeal) p 436 (Lord Justice Butler\u2010Sloss)."},{"key":"e_1_2_7_22_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1093\/medlaw\/8.1.1"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_23_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1023\/A:1021265824313"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_24_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1467-8519.2009.01717.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_25_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1353\/hcr.2011.0025"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_26_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1093\/acprof:oso\/9780199730087.001.0001"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_27_2","unstructured":"Prince v. Massachusetts (1944) 321 United States Reports 158 (US Supreme Court) p 170 (Justice Rutledge)."}],"container-title":["International Journal of Gynecology &amp; Obstetrics"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"http:\/\/api.elsevier.com\/content\/article\/PII:S0020729211003328?httpAccept=text\/plain","content-type":"text\/plain","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"http:\/\/api.elsevier.com\/content\/article\/PII:S0020729211003328?httpAccept=text\/xml","content-type":"text\/xml","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/api.wiley.com\/onlinelibrary\/tdm\/v1\/articles\/10.1016%2Fj.ijgo.2011.07.007","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/api.wiley.com\/onlinelibrary\/tdm\/v1\/articles\/10.1016%2Fj.ijgo.2011.07.007","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1016\/j.ijgo.2011.07.007","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2024,4,9]],"date-time":"2024-04-09T19:04:50Z","timestamp":1712689490000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/10.1016\/j.ijgo.2011.07.007"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2011,8,11]]},"references-count":26,"journal-issue":{"issue":"1","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2011,10]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1016\/j.ijgo.2011.07.007"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.ijgo.2011.07.007","archive":["Portico"],"relation":{},"ISSN":["0020-7292","1879-3479"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0020-7292","type":"print"},{"value":"1879-3479","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2011,8,11]]}}}