Literature DB >> 28353031

Abortion for fetal defects: two current arguments.

Susana Nuccetelli1.   

Abstract

A common utilitarian argument in favor of abortion for fetal defects rests on some controversial assumptions about what counts as a life worth living. Yet critics of abortion for fetal defects are also in need of an argument free from controversial assumptions about the future child's quality of life. Christopher Kaczor (in: Kaczor (ed), The ethics of abortion: women's rights, human life, and the question of justice, Routledge, New York, 2011) has devised an analogy that apparently satisfies this condition. On close scrutiny, however, Kaczor's analogy is too weak to debunk the common-morality intuition that at least some abortions for fetal defects are morally permissible. The upshot of this discussion is that, on the moral permissibility of abortions for fetal defects, a case-by-case approach is to be preferred.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Abortion for Down syndrome; Compromised infants; Fetal defects; Hard cases of abortion; Procreative freedom

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28353031     DOI: 10.1007/s11019-017-9765-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Health Care Philos        ISSN: 1386-7423


  7 in total

1.  Wrongful birth: judicial reticence with an emerging tort--the negligent performance of genetic counseling--Berman v. Allan, 80 N.J. 421, 404 A.2d 8 (1979)

Authors:  Caroline Brower
Journal:  Univ Dayton Law Rev       Date:  1981

Review 2.  Education and debate: Deaf lesbians, "designer disability," and the future of medicine.

Authors:  Julian Savulescu
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2002-10-05

3.  We cannot accurately predict the extent of an infant's future suffering: the Groningen Protocol is too dangerous to support.

Authors:  Alexander A Kon
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 11.229

Review 4.  Quality of life and myelomeningocele: an ethical and evidence-based analysis of the Groningen Protocol.

Authors:  Sean Barry
Journal:  Pediatr Neurosurg       Date:  2011-05-03       Impact factor: 1.162

5.  Right to life of handicapped.

Authors:  A Davis
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  1983-09       Impact factor: 2.903

Review 6.  Prenatal diagnosis and selective abortion: a challenge to practice and policy.

Authors:  A Asch
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 9.308

7.  Procreative beneficence: why we should select the best children.

Authors:  J Savulescu
Journal:  Bioethics       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 1.898

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.