File Download
There are no files associated with this item.
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
- Publisher Website: 10.1136/medethics-2012-100688
- Scopus: eid_2-s2.0-84877329373
- WOS: WOS:000318480800002
- Find via

Supplementary
- Citations:
- Appears in Collections:
Article: After-birth abortion: The intuition argument
| Title | After-birth abortion: The intuition argument |
|---|---|
| Authors | |
| Issue Date | 1-Jul-2013 |
| Publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
| Citation | Journal of Medical Ethics, 2013, v. 39, n. 5, p. e5-e5 How to Cite? |
| Abstract | The argument advanced by Giubilini and Minerva is an important one, but it suffers from some shortcomings. I briefly criticise their reasoning and method and argue that after birth abortion should be limited largely to infants with disabilities. My argument is based not on solid scientific evidence or cold rational reasoning but on intuition, something that has long been discounted as irrelevant in biomedical discourse. I end with a recommendation to all of us: in order to make a change, one should not only choose one's battles, but also one's weapon and mode of attack. |
| Persistent Identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/356902 |
| ISSN | 2023 Impact Factor: 3.3 2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.952 |
| ISI Accession Number ID |
| DC Field | Value | Language |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.author | Lederman, Zohar | - |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2025-06-23T08:52:15Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2025-06-23T08:52:15Z | - |
| dc.date.issued | 2013-07-01 | - |
| dc.identifier.citation | Journal of Medical Ethics, 2013, v. 39, n. 5, p. e5-e5 | - |
| dc.identifier.issn | 0306-6800 | - |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/356902 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | <p> <span>The argument advanced by Giubilini and Minerva is an important one, but it suffers from some shortcomings. I briefly criticise their reasoning and method and argue that after birth abortion should be limited largely to infants with disabilities. My argument is based not on solid scientific evidence or cold rational reasoning but on intuition, something that has long been discounted as irrelevant in biomedical discourse. I end with a recommendation to all of us: in order to make a change, one should not only choose one's battles, but also one's weapon and mode of attack.</span> <br></p> | - |
| dc.language | eng | - |
| dc.publisher | BMJ Publishing Group | - |
| dc.relation.ispartof | Journal of Medical Ethics | - |
| dc.rights | This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. | - |
| dc.title | After-birth abortion: The intuition argument | - |
| dc.type | Article | - |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.1136/medethics-2012-100688 | - |
| dc.identifier.scopus | eid_2-s2.0-84877329373 | - |
| dc.identifier.volume | 39 | - |
| dc.identifier.issue | 5 | - |
| dc.identifier.spage | e5 | - |
| dc.identifier.epage | e5 | - |
| dc.identifier.eissn | 1473-4257 | - |
| dc.identifier.isi | WOS:000318480800002 | - |
| dc.identifier.issnl | 0306-6800 | - |
