What Are Risks and Benefits of Not Incorporating Information about Population Growth and Its Impact on Climate Change into Reproductive Care

Bibliographic Data

ID15744904
AuthorsBenjamin P Brown (0000-0002-3023-0427, The Centers, corresponding author), Julie Chor (0000-0001-8668-0454, The Centers)
Year2017
Volume19
Issue12
Pages1157-1163
Publication date2017-12-01
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueThe AMA Journal of Ethic (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2376-6980 • E-ISSN: 2376-6980
PublisherAmerican Medical Association (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.12.ecas1-1712
PMID29278341
OpenAlexW2771693701
LanguageEN
Citations received1
References cited6

Fears about the impact of family planning decisions on the environment are not new. Concerns about population growth have often been conflated with concerns about the increasing demographic influence of specific feared or marginalized groups, leading to subsequent unjust treatment of those targeted populations. In clinical encounters such as this case, in which the patient expresses concerns about having another child in light of the effect of population growth on climate change, it is not appropriate for the clinician to impose environmental protection values on a patient's reproductive decision making, as this risks undermining her autonomy as well as perpetuating injustice. When a patient raises such worries, however, the physician's responsibility is to elicit and try to understand the patient's preferences and then to offer treatment choices that align with those values

Biology · Business · Climate change · Conflation · Economics · Environmental planning · Environmental resource management · Geography · Natural resource economics · Population · Population growth · Sociology · Climate Change and Health Impacts · Demography · Global Maternal and Child Health · Reproductive Health and Technologies · Ecology

Tools

Open DOISci-HubOpen Access