Ethics, Law and Health: the day after the thrombophilia law was vetoed

Abstract

This is our third article published in the journal HEMATOLOGIA during the last year about Thrombophilia Law. Though we waited for the possibility of discussing the law with the legislators before being voted, we missed the opportunity. Senators voted the law; the medical voice was not heard. Finally the president vetoed the law and argued in the Official Gazette: the tests are expressly not recommended to be routinely carried out adding that it has been questioned by medical societies Argentine Thrombosis and Hemostasis Group (CAHT) and Hematology Society (SAH) in coincidence with the Ministry of Health. In spite of this decision, there is actually a parliamentary claim for the justification of the presidential veto. In these cases the ethical reflection is an important tool.
The ethics aspects to be considered are: patient’s autonomy in demanding thrombophilia tests vs medical autonomy in the obligation to prescribe them when unnecessary; universal study of hereditary thrombophilia in healthy women; the use of medication in pregnancy that is off label or non-validated; the distribution of economic resources; the role of Public Health in defining Health Programs and Policies when the population demands the government action in areas where scientific evidence do not support this petition and the aspects related to the unresolved questions such as investigation and regulation of research in pregnant women.