Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Genetic ignorance and reasonable paternalism.Tuija Takala - 2001 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 22 (5):485-491.
    The question concerning an individual''s rightto remain in ignorance regarding her owngenetic makeup is central to debates aboutgenetic information. Whatever is decided onthis matter has a weighty bearing on all of therelated third-party issues, such as whetherfamily members or employers should be toldabout an individual''s genetic makeup. Thosearguing that no right to genetic ignoranceexists tend to argue from a viewpoint I havecalled in this paper reasonablepaternalism. It is an appealing position whichrests on widely shared intuitions on reasonablechoices, but which, in (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  • Acting parentally: an argument against sex selection.R. McDougall - 2005 - Journal of Medical Ethics 31 (10):601-605.
    The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority’s recent restrictive recommendations on sex selection have highlighted the need for consideration of the plausibility of ethical arguments against sex selection. In this paper, the author suggests a parental virtues approach to some questions of reproductive ethics as a superior alternative to an exclusively harm focused approach such as the procreative liberty framework. The author formulates a virtue ethics argument against sex selection based on the idea that acceptance is a character trait of the (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   21 citations  
  • Harming as causing harm.Elizabeth Harman - 2009 - In M. A. Roberts & D. T. Wasserman (eds.), Harming Future Persons. Springer Verlag. pp. 137--154.
    $130.18 new   (collection)    View on Amazon.com
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   64 citations  
  • Two Varieties of “Better-For” Judgements.Peter Herissone-Kelly - 2009 - In David Wasserman & Melinda Roberts (eds.), Harming Future Persons. Springer. pp. 249--263.
    This paper argues against Julian Savulescu's principle of procreative beneficence. It maintains that prospective parents have no obligation at all to choose the child, out of a range of possible children, who is likely to lead the best life. This is because a standpoint that the author labels "the internal perspective" is a perfectly appropriate one for parents to adopt when thinking about their own future children. It is only policy makers who are obliged to take up an opposing standpoint--"the (...)
    $130.18 new   (collection)    View on Amazon.com
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations