These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: The antiabortion movement and Baby Jane Doe.
    Author: Paige C, Karnofsky EB.
    Journal: J Health Polit Policy Law; 1986; 11(2):255-69. PubMed ID: 3745839.
    Abstract:
    In the early 1980s, the leadership of the antiabortion movement became involved in a campaign to establish legal rights to extraordinary medical care for seriously handicapped newborns. Armed with political contacts in the Reagan administration and Congress, and allied with advocates for the disabled, the antiabortion movement searched for a test case to guide through the courts. Antiabortion advocate Lawrence Washburn found such a case in Baby Jane Doe, who was being treated at Stony Brook Medical Center. The movement went on to amend the Child Abuse Act to include protections for handicapped newborns. Activists in the movement chose the issue of Baby Jane Doe because they believed it would attract welcome publicity, give them the appearance of supporting civil rights, and enhance their argument as to the legal rights of the fetus and thus strengthen the case against abortion. The movement was partially successful in obtaining its goals. The authors analyze the right-to-life movement's involvement in the controversy surrounding the withholding of treatment from handicapped newborns. They attribute the movement's interest in this issue to a desire to "improve its image, hone its legal strategy, and make new friends" among advocates for the disabled. Working with the latter, the antiabortion movement lobbied in support of the Department of Health and Human Services' "Baby Doe" regulations, which were drawn up to prevent hospitals that receive federal funds from discriminating against handicapped infants. The coalition regarded New York's "Baby Jane Doe" as a test case of the regulations in the courts, while its members continued to press for state and federal legislation guaranteeing treatment for most seriously ill newborns. Paige and Karnofsky conclude that, despite some setbacks, the right-to-life movement achieved many of its goals before shifting its attention back to banning abortion. This article relates in detail the effort of the antiabortion movement in the U.S. to include in its ranks the handicapped rights movement, and establish legal rights to extraordinary medical care for seriously handicapped newborns. They hoped to enlarge their base of support from right wing voters, improve their image in terms of caring about the fate of children already born and civil rights in general. Some of their efforts detailed here include gathering of political support, getting candidates elected, launching a popular book, courting support of related organizations, organizing "whistle blowers" to find legal test cases, prompting letter campaigns timed to intercept court decisions and pressuring for legislation. They tried a test case in 1983, concerning a newborn with microcephaly, spina bifida and hydrocephaly, for whom her parents had refused to sign consent to operate. Despite their efforts, the Supreme Court refused to hear the case, countering that the parents had the right to decide and that the lawyer had no standing in court. The antiabortion movement, however, did succeed in including amendments of their design in the Child Abuse Act, limiting the freedom of hospitals to choose care for seriously handicapped newborns. The movement met resistance from both the medical establishment and the populace, especially on the issue of parents' civil rights to choose treatment. They attained some success, but have relegated this topic to the background since 1984.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]