# Debate: Should Parents be able to Request Non-Resuscitation for All Extremely Premature Newborn Infants?

## TL;DR

The paper discusses whether parents should be allowed to choose non-resuscitation for extremely premature infants, highlighting ethical differences across countries.

## Contribution

It presents two contrasting views to inform ethical debates on parental discretion in neonatal care.

## Key findings

- There are significant variations in allowing non-resuscitation for extremely premature infants across countries.
- Differences in treatment outcomes, resources, and societal values make a uniform approach unrealistic.
- Points of potential consensus and compromise can still be identified despite disagreements.

## Abstract

Infants who are born extremely prematurely can survive if they receive intensive medical treatment. However, they also have a high chance of dying, and a proportion of survivors have long-term health problems and disabilities. In many parts of the world, if parents request it, an extremely premature infant can receive palliative care rather than active survival-focused care at birth. But there are variations between countries as to whether or when this is permitted. To help inform ethical debates across Asia and more widely, we present two contrasting views about parental discretion and the treatment of extremely preterm infants. In questions of this nature, disagreement and dissensus are inevitable. Differences in the outcomes of treatment, the resources available, and the values of society mean that we should not expect a uniform approach. We identify points of potential consensus and compromise despite disagreement.