Baby Doe at Twenty-Five

Publication Title

Georgia State University Law Review

Document Type

Article

Publication Date

1-1-2008

Abstract

The so-called Baby Doe Rules, which are federal laws defining "medical neglect" of newborns for states receiving federal funds for child abuse programs, remain controversial twenty five years after they were enacted. To explore their contemporary significance, Georgia State University's College of Law, in partnership with Emory University's Center for Ethics, hosted a law review symposium in February 2009 on "The 25th Anniversary of the Baby Doe Rules: Perspectives from the Fields of Law, Health Care, Ethics, and Disability Policy." Nationally prominent professionals with expertise in neonatal medicine and decision-making in these diverse, interdisciplinary fields spent the day engaged in challenging debate and thoughtful reflection on these federal rules. * This Foreword provides a roadmap to the speakers' essays and an introduction to the complex issues in medicine, bioethics, law, and disability policy that the Baby Doe Rules continue to raise. After twenty-five years, the Baby Doe Rules have not resolved how decisions about appropriate treatment for seriously ill and extremely premature infants should be made, nor have they forged a societal consensus over the standards for decision-making. While the Rules may not be openly used to guide decision-making in much of clinical practice today, they continue to reflect the underlying ethical and societal tensions that prompted their enactment in the first place and that still need to be resolved.

Comments

External Links
Westlaw
Lexis Advance
HeinOnline

Recommended Citation

Charity Scott, Baby Doe at Twenty-Five, 25 Ga. St. U. L. Rev. 801 (2008).

Volume

25

Issue

4

First Page

801

Last Page

834

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS