These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
211 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25684382)
21. Assisted procreation and its relationship to genetics and eugenics. Ricci ML Hum Reprod Genet Ethics; 2009; 15(1):7-27. PubMed ID: 19580100 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Failures of Imagination: Disability and the Ethics of Selective Reproduction. Soniewicka M Bioethics; 2015 Oct; 29(8):557-63. PubMed ID: 25689344 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Pandora's progeny: ethical issues in assisted human reproduction. Cameron NM Fam Law Q; 2005; 39(3):745-79. PubMed ID: 16610155 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
24. Women's right to choose rationally: genetic information, embryo selection, and genetic manipulation. Chambers JE Camb Q Healthc Ethics; 2003; 12(4):418-28. PubMed ID: 14619374 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
25. [Embryonal genetic diagnosis and reproductive freedom in assisted procreation]. Abellán F Rev Derecho Genoma Hum; 2006; (25):21-53. PubMed ID: 17393795 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. A sketch of L'avenir de la nature humaine. Habermas J APA Newsl Philos Med; 2003; 3(1):155-7. PubMed ID: 15115009 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
27. On our obligation to select the best children: a reply to Savulescu. de Melo-Martin I Bioethics; 2004; 18(1):72-83. PubMed ID: 15168699 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Behavioural genetics: why eugenic selection is preferable to enhancement. Savulescu J; Hemsley M; Newson A; Foddy B J Appl Philos; 2006; 23(2):157-71. PubMed ID: 17036429 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. [Ethical analysis and commentary of Dignitas Personae document: from continuity toward the innovation]. Pastor LM Cuad Bioet; 2011; 22(74):25-46. PubMed ID: 21692553 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Genetic dilemmas and the child's right to an open future. Davis DS Rutgers Law J; 1997; 28():549-92. PubMed ID: 12465646 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
31. Genetic selection of offspring characteristics. Robertson JA Boston Univ Law Rev; 1996 Jun; 76(3):421-82. PubMed ID: 11660289 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. Human embryonic stem cell research and the discarded embryo argument. Moller M Theor Med Bioeth; 2009; 30(2):131-45. PubMed ID: 19267254 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. The fallacy of the Principle of Procreative Beneficence. Bennett R Bioethics; 2009 Jun; 23(5):265-73. PubMed ID: 18477055 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Does bioethics provide answers?: Secular and religious bioethics and our procreative future. Smolin DM Cumberland Law Rev; 2004-2005; 35(3):473-517. PubMed ID: 16715560 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
36. Catholic teaching and the law concerning the new reproductive technologies. Alvare HM Fordham Urban Law J; 2002 Nov; 30(1):107-34. PubMed ID: 15868664 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
37. A not-so-new eugenics. Harris and Savulescu on human enhancement. Sparrow R Hastings Cent Rep; 2011; 41(1):32-42. PubMed ID: 21329104 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Reprogenetics and the "parents have always done it" argument. Malmqvist E Hastings Cent Rep; 2011; 41(1):43-9. PubMed ID: 21329105 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Good parents would not fulfil their obligation to genetically enhance their unborn children. Tonkens R J Med Ethics; 2011 Oct; 37(10):606-10. PubMed ID: 21546517 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]