Order in the Steinhaus case

In April 1986, one-month-old Lance Tyler Steinhaus sustained serious injuries, attributed to abuse by his father, that left him comatose. His mother and his physicians agreed that he should not be treated aggressively. The Redwood County (Minnesota) Welfare Department obtained a temporary order restraining withdrawal of Lance's antibiotic therapy. Lance's mother and Dr. David Steinhorn, a pediatrician, appealed to the County Court to dissolve the temporary injunction. Judge George I. Harrelson in this decision denied their request on the grounds that both state and federal law establish that infants with life-threatening conditions have a right to medically-indicated treatment and that Lance Steinhaus had such a right because he was in a "vegetative state" rather than technically "comatose." [Editor's note: After conducting another hearing on Lance's neurological status, the court ruled on 18 October that Lance was irreversibly comatose and ordered only "comfort care."]     

Work,fertility, and the status of women in Mexico

Among the major transformations affecting Mexican women in recent decades were their growing participation in the labor market and the fertility decline that began in the 1970s with widespread access to contraception. Data from 3 major Mexican fertility surveys, employment surveys, and censuses are used to analyze changes in female employment and their determinants during the years of economic recession in the 1980s. The main characteristics of the Mexican fertility decline are described, and the relationship between fertility and female employment before and during the economic recession is scrutinized for different social sectors. Suggestions for research on the affects of these changes on the social condition of Mexican women are then presented. The proportions of Mexican women over 12 years old who declared themselves economically active increased from 16% in 1970 to 21% in 1979 and 32% in 1987. Until the 1970s the majority of employed women were young and single or childless. But a clear increase occurred between 1976-87 in the economic participation of older women in union. Economic participation of low income and less educated women increased as they sought work or created their own in response to deteriorating living conditions during the recession. Young women with intermediate or higher educational levels did not increase their relative presence in the labor market in the same period. The marked increase in economic participation of less educated women in union with small children was accompanied by a significant increase in manual occupations. Between 1982-87, the proportion of women aged 20-49 in nonsalaried manual occupations rose from 7.6% to 18.5%. Mexico's fertility decline has been well documented. The total fertility rate declined from 6.3 in 1973 to 3.8 in 1986, while the percentage of women in union using a contraceptive method increased from 30.2 in 1976 to 52.7 in 1987. Fertility differentials have been declining but are still considerable. The inhibitory influence of children on female labor force participation in Mexico is clear, but in the years of economic recession the most notable increase in female workers was in women with 3 or more children of whom the youngest was under 3. It appears that the influence of children on women's employment depends on the socioeconomic status of the woman as well as on the dynamism or sluggishness of the labor market. Research is needed on the significance of changes in fertility and female employment for women's status in Mexico. Several recent works have presented results of microsocial analyses of the ways in which women experience changes in their lives resulting from fertility and employment decisions. A methodological strategy for studying these changes and their influence on women's status should focus on comparisons between different generations and birth cohorts, different types of employment, and different socioeconomic statuses. Both macrosocial and microsocial forms of analysis are needed to provide a full picture.     

Rogers v. Whitaker

The High Court of Australia affirmed the Supreme Court of New South Wales' determination that a doctor has a duty to warn a patient of any material risk involved in a proposed treatment. A risk is considered material if a reasonable person in similar circumstances would attach significance to the risk, or if the doctor is, or should be, cognizant that the particular patient would express concern about the risk. The trial court overruled the precept that a doctor could not be found negligent in warning a patient if the doctor acted within the purview of common practice, even though other practitioners may follow different procedures and regardless of the particular patient's concerns. In this case, Maree Whitaker became essentially blind after an unsucessful operation on her right eye caused sympathetic ophthalmia in her left eye. Although there was no question that the surgery had been performed with the requisite skill and care, Ms. Whitaker petitioned the court for relief due to the failure of the ophthalmologist, Dr. Christopher Rogers, to warn her of the possibility (approximately 1 in 14,000) that the sympathetic ophthalmia condition could develop. The trial court's award of damages was affirmed because, in spite of Ms. Whitaker's expressed specific concern that her "good eye" not be harmed, Dr. Rogers did not inform her of the potential risks associated with the surgery.