Pro‐Life Arguments Against Infanticide and Why they are Not Convincing

Bioethics 30 (9):656-662 (2016)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva's controversial article ‘After-Birth Abortion: Why Should the Baby Live?’ has received a lot of criticism since its publishing. Part of the recent criticism has been made by pro-life philosopher Christopher Kaczor, who argues against infanticide in his updated book ‘Ethics of Abortion’. Kaczor makes four arguments to show where Giubilini and Minerva's argument for permitting infanticide goes wrong. In this article I argue that Kaczor's arguments, and some similar arguments presented by other philosophers, are mistaken and cannot show Giubilini and Minerva's view to be flawed. I claim that if one wants to reject the permissibility of infanticide, one must find better arguments for doing so.
Categories
PhilPapers/Archive ID
RSNPAA
Revision history
Archival date: 2019-09-16
View upload history
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Schrödinger’s Fetus.Joona Räsänen - 2020 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 23 (1):125-130.

Add more citations

Added to PP index
2016-09-09

Total views
96 ( #31,970 of 47,300 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
44 ( #18,309 of 47,300 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.