Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Fetuses, Newborns, and Parental Responsibility.Prabhpal Singh - 2020 - Journal of Medical Ethics 46 (3):188-193.
    I defend a relational account of difference in the moral status between fetuses and newborns. The difference in moral status between a fetus and a newborn is that the newborn baby is the proper object of ‘parental responsibility’ whereas the fetus is not. ‘Parental responsibilities’ are a moral dimension of a ‘parent-child relation’, a relation which newborn babies stand in, but fetuses do not. I defend this relational account by analyzing the concepts of ‘parent’ and ‘child’, and conclude that the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Schrödinger’s Fetus.Joona Räsänen - 2020 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 23 (1):125-130.
    This paper defends and develops Elizabeth Harman’s Actual Future Principle with a concept called Schrödinger’s Fetus. I argue that all early fetuses are Schrödinger’s Fetuses: those early fetuses that survive and become conscious beings have full moral status already as early fetuses, but those fetuses that die as early fetuses lack moral status. With Schrödinger’s Fetus, it becomes possible to accept two widely held but contradictory intuitions to be true, and to avoid certain reductiones ad absurdum that pro-life and pro-choice (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Fine-Tuning the Impairment Argument.Bruce P. Blackshaw & Perry Hendricks - 2020 - Journal of Medical Ethics 1:medethics-2020-106904.
    Perry Hendricks’ original impairment argument for the immorality of abortion is based on the impairment principle (TIP): if impairing an organism to some degree is immoral, then ceteris paribus, impairing it to a higher degree is also immoral. Since abortion impairs a fetus to a higher degree than fetal alcohol syndrome (FAS) and giving a fetus FAS is immoral, it follows that abortion is immoral. Critics have argued that the ceteris paribus is not met for FAS and abortion, and so (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Violinists, Demandingness, and the Impairment Argument Against Abortion.Dustin Crummett - 2020 - Bioethics 34 (2):214-220.
    The ‘impairment argument’ against abortion developed by Perry Hendricks aims to derive the wrongness of abortion from the wrongness of causing foetal alcohol syndrome. Hendricks endorses an ‘impairment principle’, which states that, if it is wrong to inflict an impairment of a certain degree on an organism, then, ceteris paribus, it is also wrong to inflict a more severe impairment on that organism. Causing FAS is wrong in virtue of the impairment it inflicts. But abortion inflicts an even more severe (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Against the Impairment Argument: A Reply to Hendricks.Joona Räsänen - 2020 - Bioethics 34 (8):862–864.
    In an article of this journal, Perry Hendricks makes a novel argument for the immorality of abortion. According to his impairment argument, abortion is immoral because: (a) it is wrong to impair a fetus to the nth degree, such as causing the fetus to have fetal alcohol syndrome (FAS); (b) it is wrong to impair a fetus to the n+1 degree (to cause the fetus to be more impaired than to have FAS); (c) killing the fetus impairs the fetus to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • MIP Does Not Save the Impairment Argument Against Abortion: A Reply to Blackshaw and Hendricks.Dustin Crummett - forthcoming - Journal of Medical Ethics:medethics-2020-106566.
    Perry Hendricks’ original ‘impairment argument’ against abortion relied on ‘the impairment principle’ : ‘if it is immoral to impair an organism O to the nth degree, then, ceteris paribus, it is immoral to impair O to the n+1 degree.’ Since death is a bigger impairment than fetal alcohol syndrome, Hendricks reasons that, by TIP, if causing FAS is immoral, then, ceteris paribus, abortion is immoral. Several authors have argued that this conclusion is uninteresting, since the ceteris paribus clause is not (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Against the Strengthened Impairment Argument: Never-Born Fetuses Have No FLO to Deprive.Alex R. Gillham - forthcoming - Journal of Medical Ethics:medethics-2020-106579.
    In order for the so-called strengthened impairment argument to succeed, it must posit some reason R that causing fetal alcohol syndrome is immoral, one that also holds in cases of abortion. In formulating SIA, Blackshaw and Hendricks borrow from Don Marquis to claim that the reason R that causing FAS is immoral lies in the fact that it deprives an organism of a future like ours. I argue here that SIA fails to show that it is immoral to cause FAS (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Strengthening the Impairment Argument Against Abortion.Bruce Philip Blackshaw & Perry Hendricks - 2020 - Journal of Medical Ethics 1 (Online):medethics-2020-106153.
    Perry Hendricks’ impairment argument for the immorality of abortion is based on two premises: first, impairing a fetus with fetal alcohol syndrome (FAS) is immoral, and second, if impairing an organism to some degree is immoral, then ceteris paribus, impairing it to a higher degree is also immoral. He calls this the impairment principle (TIP). Since abortion impairs a fetus to a higher degree than FAS, it follows from these two premises that abortion is immoral. Critics have focussed on the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Medical Sexism: Contraception Access, Reproductive Medicine, and Health Care.Jill B. Delston - 2019 - Lexington Books.
    Why do some doctors routinely deny birth control refills without additional tests, and why do some doctors disrespect patient autonomy in decisions about abortions, labor and delivery, organ transplants, and more? This book argues that medical sexism is a major cause of this pervasive mistreatment.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • (Regrettably) Abortion Remains Immoral: The Impairment Argument Defended.Perry C. Hendricks - 2019 - Bioethics 33 (8):968-969.
    In my article "Even if the fetus is not a person, abortion is immoral: The impairment argument" (this journal), I defended what I called “The impairment argument” which purports to show that abortion is immoral. Bruce Blackshaw (2019) has argued that my argument fails on three accounts. In this article, I respond to his criticisms.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Abortion is Incommensurable with Fetal Alcohol Syndrome.Claire Pickard - 2020 - Bioethics 34 (2):207-210.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • The Impairment Argument for the Immorality of Abortion Revisited.Bruce P. Blackshaw - 2019 - Bioethics (Online):211-213.
    Perry Hendricks has recently presented the impairment argument for the immorality of abortion, to which I responded and he has now replied. The argument is based on the premise that impairing a fetus with fetal alcohol syndrome is immoral, and on the principle that if impairing an organism is immoral, impairing it to a higher degree is also—the impairment principle. If abortion impairs a fetus to a higher degree, then this principle entails abortion is immoral. In my reply, I argued (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • The Impairment Argument for the Immorality of Abortion: A Reply.Bruce P. Blackshaw - 2019 - Bioethics 33 (6):723-724.
    In his recent article Perry Hendricks presents what he calls the impairment argument to show that abortion is immoral. To do so, he argues that to give a fetus fetal alcohol syndrome is immoral. Because killing the fetus impairs it more than giving it fetal alcohol syndrome, Hendricks concludes that killing the fetus must also be immoral. Here, I claim that killing a fetus does not impair it in the way that giving it fetal alcohol syndrome does. By examining the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Why the Embryo Rescue Case is a Bad Argument Against Embryonic Personhood.Perry Hendricks - 2019 - Bioethics 33 (6):669-673.
    The “Embryo Rescue Case” (ERC) refers to a thought experiment that is used to argue against the view that embryos have a right to life (i.e. are persons). I will argue that cognitive science undermines the intuition elicited by the ERC; I will show that whether or not embryos have a right to life, our mental tools will make it very difficult to believe that embryos have said right. This suggests that the intuition elicited by the ERC is not truth (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation