Letter. Making sense of rising caesarean section rates. Trials and speaking with patients take time. The British Medical Journal 2004;329:1240.

Choose your font:
✓ Arimo
➡ Merriweather
➡ Mukta Malar
➡ Open Sans Condensed
➡ Rokkitt
➡ Source Sans Pro

✓ English
➡ Français
➡ Português
➡ Español

	Database - (CIANE)
Description of this bibliographical database (CIANE website) Currently 3111 records ➡ YouTube channel (tutorial)

https://ciane.net/id=1066 Created on : 02 Dec 2004 Modified on : 01 Dec 2007	➡ Modify this record Do not follow this link unless you know an editor’s password! Share: Easy
Bibliographical entry (without author) :	Letter. Making sense of rising caesarean section rates. Trials and speaking with patients take time. The British Medical Journal 2004;329:1240.
Author(s) :	Gorincour G.
Year of publication :	2004
URL(s) :	http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/329/74…
Résumé (français) :	Reponse a l’editorial fiche 904.
Abstract (English) :	EDITOR—We agree with Anderson that we should have a more comprehensive and frank debate about the ethical issues related to the role of doctors, preferences of patients, and informed consent with respect to caesarean section.1 In response to Minkoff et al,2 we argued that not offering caesarean section was incompatible with the principle of autonomy.3 Particularly in English speaking countries, the historical role of the doctor is changing, thanks to the increasing reliance on a model where the patient is seen as the consumer and the doctor as supplier of services.4 The paternalistic model is still strong in Europe, and the debate about caesarean section may simply reflect today’s difficulties in building a new form of doctor-patient relationship. Nowadays, trust is not enough for patients: they need proof and evidence. But medicine is both an art and a science, and sometimes there is no clear proof or evidence. Is trust still possible at the very time a major medical liability crisis is happening worldwide?5 Answering this question may be as long, difficult, and important as waiting for the results of any randomised controlled trial.
Sumário (português) :
Resumen (español) :
Comments :
Argument (français) :
Argument (English):
Argumento (português):
Argumento (español):
Keywords :	➡ c-section/caesarean ; ethics ; deontology ; informed consent
Author of this record :	Cécile Loup — 02 Dec 2004 ➡ latest update : Bernard Bel — 01 Dec 2007

	Discussion (display only in English)

➡ Only identified users Click “login” on the top right to sign in or create your account I have read the guidelines of discussions and I accept all terms
[Hide guidelines] ➡ Discussion guidelines 1) Comments aim at clarifying the content of the publication or suggesting links for a better comprehension of its topic 2) All comments are public and opinions expressed belong to their authors 3) Avoid casual talk and personal stories 4) Any off-topic comment or containing inappropriate statements will be deleted without notice

barre

New expert query --- New simple query

Creating new record --- Importing records

User management --- Dump database --- Contact

bar

This database created by Alliance francophone pour l'accouchement respecté (AFAR) is managed
by Collectif interassociatif autour de la naissance (CIANE, https://ciane.net).
It is fed by the voluntary contributions of persons interested in the sharing of scientific data.
If you agree with this project, you can support us in several ways:
(1) contributing to this database if you have a minimum training in documentation
(2) or financially supporting CIANE (see below)
(3) or joining any society affiliated with CIANE.
➡ Sign in or create an account to follow changes or become an editor.
➡ Contact bibli(arobase)ciane.net for more information.

Donating to CIANE (click “Faire un don”) will help us to maintain and develop sites and public
databases towards the support of parents and caregivers’ informed decisions with respect to childbirth