Baby K

Case of anencephaly in medical ethics

Baby K was the name given to a child born with anencephaly, a severe neural tube defect where a major portion of the brain, skull, and scalp is absent. This case became significant in the field of medical ethics and healthcare law due to the legal battles surrounding the medical care provided to Baby K.

Background

Anencephaly in a newborn

Baby K was born on October 13, 1992, at the Fairfax Hospital in Falls Church, Virginia. The infant was diagnosed with anencephaly, a condition that is incompatible with long-term survival. Despite the prognosis, Baby K's mother insisted on providing full medical support, including mechanical ventilation, to sustain the infant's life.

Medical and Ethical Issues

Anencephaly is a condition where the cerebral hemispheres are absent, leading to a lack of higher brain functions. Infants with this condition are usually stillborn or die shortly after birth. The ethical dilemma in Baby K's case revolved around the use of medical resources to prolong the life of an infant with no hope of recovery or meaningful interaction with the environment.

Legal Proceedings

The hospital sought to limit the medical interventions provided to Baby K, arguing that continued treatment was futile and not in the best interest of the child. However, Baby K's mother, citing her religious beliefs, insisted on the continuation of life-sustaining treatment.

The case went to court, and in 1994, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ruled in favor of Baby K's mother. The court's decision was based on the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA), which requires hospitals to provide stabilizing treatment to any patient with an emergency medical condition.

Impact on Medical Ethics and Law

The Baby K case highlighted the tension between medical futility and patient autonomy. It raised questions about the allocation of medical resources and the role of healthcare providers in making decisions about life-sustaining treatment.

The case also influenced discussions on the rights of patients and families to demand treatment that healthcare providers may consider non-beneficial. It underscored the importance of clear communication and ethical guidelines in handling cases involving severe congenital anomalies.

Related pages

• Anencephaly
• Medical ethics
• Neonatal care
• Healthcare law