Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Queerin’ the PGD Clinic: Human Enhancement and the Future of Bodily Diversity.Robert Sparrow - 2013 - Journal of Medical Humanities 34 (2):177-196.
    Disability activists influenced by queer theory and advocates of “human enhancement” have each disputed the idea that what is “normal” is normatively significant, which currently plays a key role in the regulation of pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD). Previously, I have argued that the only way to avoid the implication that parents have strong reasons to select children of one sex (most plausibly, female) over the other is to affirm the moral significance of sexually dimorphic human biological norms. After outlining the (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • When choosing the traits of children is hurtful to others.Timothy Murphy - 2011 - Journal of Medical Ethics 37 (2):105-108.
    Some commentators object to the use of embryonic and fetal diagnostic technologies by parents who wish to avoid disabilities in their children. In particular, they say this use is hurtful in the meaning it expresses, namely that the lives of people with disabilities are not valuable or are less valuable than the lives of others. Other commentators have tried to show that this meaning does not necessarily belong to parents' choices and is not therefore credible as a general moral objection. (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Deciding against disability: does the use of reproductive genetic technologies express disvalue for people with disabilities?J. Malek - 2010 - Journal of Medical Ethics 36 (4):217-221.
    This paper focuses on one objection to the use of reproductive genetic technologies (RGTs): the argument known as the expressivist objection. According to this argument, the choice to use reproductive genetic technologies to prevent the birth of individuals with disabilities is an expression of disvalue for existing people with disability. Many have been persuaded by this impassioned perspective. This paper shows that this argument is misguided and so does not constitute a sound objection to the use of RGTs to prevent (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • Why human germline genome editing is incompatible with equality in an inclusive society.Calum MacKellar - 2021 - The New Bioethics 27 (1):19-29.
    Human germline genome editing is increasingly being seen as acceptable provided certain conditions are satisfied. Accordingly, genetic modifications would take place on eggs or sperm (or their prec...
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Disabled bodies on earth and in heaven.Margaret D. Kamitsuka - 2021 - Journal of Religious Ethics 49 (2):358-380.
    Journal of Religious Ethics, Volume 49, Issue 2, Page 358-380, June 2021.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
    		•
  • Redefining Disability: Maleficent, Unjust and Inconsistent.Becky Cox-White & Susanna Flavia Boxall - 2008 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 33 (6):558-576.
    Disability activists' redefinition of “disability” as a social, rather than a medical, problem attempts to reassign causality. We explicate the untenable implications of this approach and argue this definition is maleficent, unjust, and inconsistent. Thus, redefining disability as a socially caused phenomenon is, from a moral point of view, ill-advised.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Review of Catherine Mills, Futures of Reproduction: Bioethics and Biopolitics1. [REVIEW]Silvia Camporesi - 2016 - American Journal of Bioethics 16 (6):1-3.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
    		•
  • Expressed Ableism.Stephen M. Campbell & Joseph A. Stramondo - 2022 - Ergo: An Open Access Journal of Philosophy 9.
    With increased frequency, reproductive technologies are placing prospective parents in the position of choosing whether to bring a disabled child into the world. The most well-known objection to the act of “selecting against disability” is known as the Expressivist Argument. The argument claims that such acts express a negative or disrespectful message about disabled people and that one has a moral reason to avoid sending such messages. We have two primary aims in this essay. The first is to critically examine (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
    		•
  • The Expressivist Argument, Prenatal Diagnosis, and Selective Abortion: An Appeal to the Social Construction of Disability.Carolyn Gonter - unknown
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Genes, identity, and the expressivist critique.Robert Sparrow - 2008 - In Loane Skene and Janna Thompson (ed.), The Sorting Society. Cambridge University Press. pp. 111-132..
    In this paper, I explore the “expressivist critique” of the use of prenatal testing to select against the birth of persons with impairments. I begin by setting out the expressivist critique and then highlighting, through an investigation of an influential objection to this critique, the ways in which both critics and proponents of the use of technologies of genetic selection negotiate a difficult set of dilemmas surrounding the relationship between genes and identity. I suggest that we may be able to (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations