Harvey and Gurvir’s Law: Ontario Bill for Quality Prenatal Information about Down Syndrome: Terminology, Feasibility, and Ethical Issues

, , , , , , &
Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 51 (3):651-657 (2023)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Harvey and Gurvir’s Law is a bill proposed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario (Canada) to reduce stigma and bias associated with Down syndrome, by developing and disseminating quality information about Down syndrome in the context of prenatal testing.

Categories

Keywords

Reprint years

DOI

10.1017/jme.2023.110

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,168

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

My notes

Similar books and articles

Prospects for limiting access to prenatal genetic information about Down syndrome in light of the expansion of prenatal genomics.Chris Kaposy - 2022 - The New Bioethics 29 (3):226-246.
Review of: Kaposy C. (2018) Choosing Down Syndrome. [REVIEW]Meghan Chevalier - 2019 - Canadian Journal of Bioethics / Revue canadienne de bioéthique 2 (2):21-22.
6. Views on Disability and Prenatal Testing Among Families with Down Syndrome and Disability Activists.Tamar Nov-Klaiman, Marina Frisman, Aviad E. Raz & Christoph Rehmann-Sutter - 2022 - In Christina Schües (ed.), Genetic Responsibility in Germany and Israel: Practices of Prenatal Diagnosis. Transcript Verlag. pp. 163-190.
A Disability Critique of the New Prenatal Test for Down Syndrome.Chris Kaposy - 2013 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 23 (4):299-324.
Prenatal Screening, Ethics and Down’s Syndrome: a literature review.Priscilla Alderson - 2001 - Nursing Ethics 8 (4):360-374.
Prenatal Screening: An Ethical Agenda for the Near Future.Antina Jong & Guido M. W. R. Wert - 2014 - Bioethics 29 (1):46-55.
Prenatal Screening: An Ethical Agenda for the Near Future.Antina de Jong & Guido M. W. R. de Wert - 2015 - Bioethics 29 (1):46-55.
People with down syndrome - part of our community.Kerri Anne Brussen - 2012 - Chisholm Health Ethics Bulletin 18 (2):1.
Challenging Underlying Assumptions of Wrongful Birth.Jay Bringman - 2019 - The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 19 (1):37-45.
Down’s Syndrome Screening and Reproductive Politics: Care, Choice, and Disability in the Prenatal Clinic.Gareth M. Thomas - 2017 - Routledge.
Informed choice of pregnant women in prenatal screening tests for Down’s syndrome.H. -H. Chiang, Y. -M. Chao & Y. -S. Yuh - 2006 - Journal of Medical Ethics 32 (5):273-277.
Should Non-Invasiveness Change Informed Consent Procedures for Prenatal Diagnosis?Zuzana Deans & Ainsley J. Newson - 2011 - Health Care Analysis 19 (2):122-132.
Eugenics or Not, Prenatal Genetic Testing’s Common Issues Need to Be Addressed.Mark W. Leach - 2021 - In Megan A. Allyse & Marsha Michie (eds.), Born Well: Prenatal Genetics and the Future of Having Children. Springer Verlag. pp. 33-44.
Down’s Syndrome Screening and Reproductive Politics: Care, Choice, and Disability in the Prenatal Clinic. [REVIEW]Daniel Rodger - 2018 - The New Bioethics 24 (1):95-97.
Down’s syndrome screening and reproductive politics: care, choice, and disability in the prenatal clinic.Mara Buchbinder - 2018 - New Genetics and Society 37 (3):270-272.

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-12-14

Downloads
13 (#1,040,014)

6 months
13 (#198,663)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references