Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Gender and cultural understandings in medical nonindicated interventions: A critical discussion of attitudes toward nontherapeutic male circumcision and hymen (re)construction.Gily Coene & Sawitri Saharso - 2019 - Clinical Ethics 14 (1):33-41.
    Hymen construction and nontherapeutic male circumcision are medical nonindicated interventions that give rise to specific ethical concerns. In Europe, hymen construction is generally more contested among medical professionals than male circumcision. Yet, from a standard biomedical framework, guided by the principles of autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice, circumcision of boys is, as this article explains, more problematic than hymen construction. While there is a growing debate on the acceptability of infant circumcision, in the case of competent minors and adults the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Appropriations of Informed Consent: Abortion, Medical Decision Making, and Antiabortion Rhetoric.Heather Lakey - 2018 - International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 11 (1):44-75.
    Abortion has been legal in the United States since the Supreme Court's landmark 1973 ruling in Jane Roe, et al. v. Henry Wade, District Attorney of Dallas County. Over the past forty years, however, access to abortion has diminished as states have devised creative ways to regulate and restrict the abortion procedure. In the first half of 2011, state legislators introduced a record number of antiabortion bills. In 19 states alone, 80 laws ranging from mandatory counseling and waiting periods to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Does the English Law on Abortion Affront Human Dignity?Charles Foster - 2016 - The New Bioethics 22 (3):162-184.
    The English law on abortion is examined through four lenses manufactured by the principle of dignity. Those lenses are embodiment, relationality, story and a transactional, rather than an atomistic, approach to the ascertaining of the relevant interests. It is contended that this approach gives more nuanced, humane, intellectually satisfactory and pastorally satisfactory answers than those generated by the existing law. It is further argued that only this dignity-based approach is compatible with that mandated by Article 8 of the ECHR.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark