‘After-birth abortion’ and arguments from potential

Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (5):324-325 (2013)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva reject arguments from claims that fetuses and newborn infants are potential persons, because they argue that potential persons cannot be harmed.1 But whether or not potential persons can be harmed, is it clear that potential persons are entirely lacking in moral status, of a kind that could count as a reason against bringing about their demise? We do not generally regard potential as entirely lacking in moral value until it is actualised. For example, parents who believe they have identified in their child an emerging musical talent commonly see this potential as having some value, however small, which would count as a reason against destroying that …

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,219

External links

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

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-11-03

Downloads
44 (#344,726)

6 months
11 (#196,102)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Justin Oakley
Monash University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

A defense of abortion.Judith Jarvis Thomson - 1971 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 1 (1):47-66.
Virtue Theory and Abortion.Rosalind Hursthouse - 1991 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 20 (3):223-246.
Virtue Theory and Abortion.Rosalind Hursthouse - 1997 - In Roger Crisp & Michael Slote (eds.), Virtue Ethics. Oxford University Press.
Reproductive cloning and arguments from potential.Justin Oakley - 2006 - Monash Bioethics Review 25 (1):42-47.

Add more references