TY  - JOUR
T1  - THe unborn patient
AU  - Ansbacher S
Y1  - 1969/11/10
N1  - 10.1001/jama.1969.03160320085032
JO  - JAMA
SP  - 1103
EP  - 1103
VL  - 210
IS  - 6
N2  - To the Editor:— 
    Faber and Ross reviewed two recent treatises on "Life Before and at Birth" (Science [Aug 22] 1969, p 783). They concluded that "prenatal research is expensive. It is therefore often done on a casual basis by workers whose primary obligations lie elsewhere, and the results are less brilliant." This criticism may not be justifiable considering such data as presented by Gregg and Hutchinson in The Journal (209:1059, 1969). Less brilliant, however, is the editorial comment on page 1081 by Warren J. Warwick, MD, "The Unborn Patient." He concedes that the unborn is neither a vital statistic nor a tax deduction. Yet, he affirms that the unborn is a person; in fact, he may be a patient for which the patient-physician contract obtains, although he has never been met. Views such as Dr. Warwick's are not conducive to research and are much closer to the 1600 BC
SN  - 0098-7484
M3  - doi: 10.1001/jama.1969.03160320085032
UR  - http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.1969.03160320085032
ER  -