Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42746238›Full record

ArticleCureus2026

Ethical and Legal Considerations in the Refusal of Antipsychotic Treatment During Pregnancy: A Case Report.

Alexander Tam, Macey Hughes, Derry Brinley

Abstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Alexander TamMedicine, Noorda College of Osteopathic Medicine, Provo, USA.
Macey HughesMedicine, Noorda College of Osteopathic Medicine, Provo, USA.
Derry BrinleyPsychiatry, Universal Health Services (United States), Orem, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Acute psychosis during pregnancy creates a complex clinical scenario that requires simultaneous consideration of maternal psychiatric stabilization and fetal well-being. Guidance remains limited on the management of acutely psychotic pregnant patients who lack decision-making capacity and refuse care, particularly in settings without on-site obstetric resources. We describe the case of a 35-year-old woman with schizoaffective disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder who was involuntarily committed for acute behavioral disturbance and found to be approximately 14 weeks pregnant during evaluation. She remained acutely psychotic, with persistent paranoid and grandiose delusions, impaired self-care, and disruptive, sometimes aggressive behavior. A formal capacity assessment determined that she lacked the capacity to make informed decisions about psychiatric treatment or pregnancy-related care. She refused antipsychotic medication, laboratory testing, and prenatal care, and de-escalation efforts were unsuccessful. Because the treating facility lacked on-site obstetric services and pharmacologic treatment carried fetal risks that the patient could not weigh, the team pursued transfer to a facility with both psychiatric and obstetric capabilities rather than a forced-medication hearing. After 20 days, she was transferred under commitment to a state hospital. This case illustrates that pregnancy transforms an already difficult involuntary-treatment decision into a multidimensional legal, ethical, and systems problem and highlights that early pregnancy screening, predefined transfer pathways, and multidisciplinary review should guide management when acute psychosis and pregnancy intersect.

Indexed as

antipsychotics in pregnancydecision-making capacityforced medicationmaternal-fetal ethicsperinatal psychiatrypsychiatric emergency in pregnancytreatment refusal

Identifiers

PMID42746238
PMCPMC13576482

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.