Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
##common.pageHeaderLogo.altText##

Original article

Vol. 147 No. 0910 (2017)

Exploring societal solidarity in the context of extreme prematurity

DOI
https://doi.org/10.4414/smw.2017.14418
Cite this as:
Swiss Med Wkly. 2017;147:w14418
Published
07.03.2017

Summary

QUESTION

Extreme prematurity can result in long-term disabilities. Its impact on society is often not taken into account and deemed controversial. Our study examined attitudes of the Swiss population regarding extreme prematurity and people’s perspectives regarding the question of solidarity with disabled people.

METHODS

We conducted a nationwide representative anonymous telephone survey with 1210 Swiss residents aged 18 years or older. We asked how people estimate their own personal solidarity, the solidarity of their social environment and the solidarity across the country with disabled persons. Spearman’s correlation calculations were used to assess if a correlation exists between solidarity and setting financial limits to intensive care and between solidarity and withholding neonatal intensive care.

RESULTS

According to 36.0% of the respondents intensive medical care should not be withheld from extremely preterm infants, even if their chances for an acceptable quality of life were poor. For 28.8%, intensive care should be withheld from these infants, and 26.9% held an intermediate position depending on the situation. A total of 31.5% were against setting a financial limit to treatment of extremely preterm newborns with an uncertain future quality of life, 34.2% were in favour and 26.9% were deliberating. A majority (88.8%) considered their solidarity toward disabled people as substantial; the solidarity of their personal environment and of the society at large was estimated as high by 79.1% and 48.6%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The Swiss population expressed a high level of solidarity which may alleviate some pressure on parents and health care providers in the decision-making process in neonatal intensive care units. In addition, there was no relationship between solidarity and people’s willingness to pay for the care or withholding treatment of extremely preterm babies.

References

  1. Anderson JG, Baer RJ, Partridge JC, Kuppermann M, Franck LS, Rand L, et al. Survival and major morbidity of extremely preterm infants: a population-based study. Pediatrics. 2016;138(1):e20154434. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2015-4434
  2. Holsti A, Adamsson M, Serenius F, Hägglöf B, Farooqi A. Two-thirds of adolescents who received active perinatal care after extremely preterm birth had mild or no disabilities. Acta Paediatr. 2016;105(11):1288–97. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1111/apa.13499
  3. Dupont-Thibodeau A, Barrington KJ, Farlow B, Janvier A. End-of-life decisions for extremely low-gestational-age infants: why simple rules for complicated decisions should be avoided. Semin Perinatol. 2014;38(1):31–7. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1053/j.semperi.2013.07.006
  4. Einaudi M-A, Gire C, Auquier P, Le Coz P. How do physicians perceive quality of life? Ethical questioning in neonatology. BMC Med Ethics. 2015;16(1):50. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-015-0045-5
  5. Lantos JD, Meadow WL. Costs and end-of-life care in the NICU: lessons for the MICU? J Law Med Ethics. 2011;39(2):194–200. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-720X.2011.00588.x
  6. Korvenranta E, Linna M, Rautava L, Andersson S, Gissler M, Hallman M, et al.; Performance, Effectiveness, and Cost of Treatment Episodes (PERFECT) Preterm Infant Study Group. Hospital costs and quality of life during 4 years after very preterm birth. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2010;164(7):657–63. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1001/archpediatrics.2010.99
  7. Caughey AB, Burchfield DJ. Costs and cost-effectiveness of periviable care. Semin Perinatol. 2014;38(1):56–62. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1053/j.semperi.2013.07.010
  8. Partridge JC, Robertson KR, Rogers EE, Landman GO, Allen AJ, Caughey AB. Resuscitation of neonates at 23 weeks’ gestational age: a cost-effectiveness analysis. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2015;28(2):121–30. doi:.https://doi.org/10.3109/14767058.2014.909803
  9. Huhtala M, Korja R, Rautava L, Lehtonen L, Haataja L, Lapinleimu H, et al.; PIPARI Study Group. Health-related quality of life in very low birth weight children at nearly eight years of age. Acta Paediatr. 2016;105(1):53–9. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1111/apa.13241
  10. Roberts G, Burnett AC, Lee KJ, Cheong J, Wood SJ, Anderson PJ, et al.; Victorian Infant Collaborative Study Group. Quality of life at age 18 years after extremely preterm birth in the post-surfactant era. J Pediatr. 2013;163(4):1008–13.e1. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2013.05.048
  11. Wilkinson D. Death or disability? The 'Carmentis Machine' and decision-making for critically ill children: Oxford University Press; 2013.
  12. Madrigal VN, Carroll KW, Hexem KR, Faerber JA, Morrison WE, Feudtner C. Parental decision-making preferences in the pediatric intensive care unit. Crit Care Med. 2012;40(10):2876–82. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0b013e31825b9151
  13. Sharman M, Meert KL, Sarnaik AP. What influences parents’ decisions to limit or withdraw life support? Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2005;6(5):513–8. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1097/01.PCC.0000170616.28175.D9
  14. Goldnagl L, Freidl W, Stronegger WJ. Attitudes among the general Austrian population towards neonatal euthanasia: a survey. BMC Med Ethics. 2014;15(1):74. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6939-15-74
  15. Ter Meulen R, Houtepen R. Solidarity. In: Chadwick R, editors. Encyclopaedia of Applied Ethics. Oxford: Elsevier; 2012. p. 198-205.
  16. Prainsack B, Buyx A. Solidarity in contemporary bioethics--towards a new approach. Bioethics. 2012;26(7):343–50. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8519.2012.01987.x
  17. Bayertz K. Solidarity. Philosophical studies in contemporary culture. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 1999.
  18. Rorty R. Contingency, irony, and solidarity: Cambridge University Press; 1989.
  19. Cadore B, Boitte P, Demijnck G, Greiner D, Jacquemin D. Solidarity in perinatal medicine. Ethical Theory Moral Pract. 2000;3(4):435–54. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009978815674
  20. De Pietro C, Crivelli L. Swiss popular initiative for a single health insurer… once again! Health Policy. 2015;119(7):851–5. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2015.05.004
  21. Biller-Andorno N, Zeltner T. Individual responsibility and community solidarity: The Swiss health care system. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(23):2193–7. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp1508256
  22. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Item 4: Value Based Assessment. London:2014.
  23. Berger TM, Bernet V, El Alama S, Fauchère JC, Hösli I, Irion O, et al. Perinatal care at the limit of viability between 22 and 26 completed weeks of gestation in Switzerland. 2011 revision of the Swiss recommendations. Swiss Med Wkly. 2011;141:w13280. Available from: https://smw.ch/archives-search/article-detail/?tx_ezmjournal_articledetail[identifier]=smw.2011.13280.
  24. Nuffield Council on Bioethics. Critical care decisions in fetal and neonatal medicine: Ethical issues. London: England:2006.
  25. Cornfield DN, Kahn JP. Decisions about life-sustaining measures in children: in whose best interests? Acta Paediatr. 2012;101(4):333–6. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1651-2227.2011.02531.x
  26. Camosy CC. Just distribution of health-care resources and the neonatal ICU. Pediatr Rev. 2011;32(5):204–7. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1542/pir.32-5-204
  27. Wilkinson D, Savulescu J. Disability, discrimination and death: is it justified to ration life saving treatment for disabled newborn infants? Monash Bioeth Rev. 2014;32(1-2):43–62. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1007/s40592-014-0002-y
  28. Savulescu J. How do we choose which life to save? Equality of access or a fair go? Curr Paediatr. 2002;12(6):487–92. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1054/cupe.2002.0339

Most read articles by the same author(s)