Published in

Taylor & Francis (Routledge), The American Journal of Bioethics, 2(16), p. 19-21

DOI: 10.1080/15265161.2015.1120806

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Regulating Risk and the Boundaries of State Conduct: A Relational Perspective on Home Birth in Australia

Journal article published in 2016 by Jindalae K. Skerman, Ainsley J. Newson ORCID
This paper is available in a repository.
This paper is available in a repository.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Postprint: archiving allowed
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

peer-reviewed commentary ; The concept of motivated reasoning and conflicting moral domains behind the state’s conduct towards pregnant women, as described by Minkoff and Marshall (2015), can also be observed in the apparent attitudes towards homebirth in Australia. In this commentary, we briefly outline the status of homebirth in Australia and provide some examples of motivated reasoning in the Australian context. Despite this, some commentators have refrained from risk-based judgments to instead emphasize the importance of communication with, and making ‘reasonable accommodation’ for, pregnant women; even in high-risk situations. We consider that a relational approach might work better than Minkoff and Marshall’s conclusion that pregnant women are best situated to decide on risk. Indeed, their paper hints to a relational approach at several points, but this is not explicitly taken up. We also claim that a relational approach provides a way to give rise to a principled compromise of conflicts in this contested space.