168 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36121890)
1. Abortion, Rights, and Cabin Cases.
Simkulet W
New Bioeth; 2022 Dec; 28(4):315-326. PubMed ID: 36121890
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. On the impairment argument.
Simkulet W
Bioethics; 2021 Jun; 35(5):400-406. PubMed ID: 33527428
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Why the immorality of consuming alcohol during pregnancy cannot tell us that abortion is immoral: A reply to Hendricks.
Lundgren B
Bioethics; 2021 May; 35(4):388-389. PubMed ID: 33655514
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Violinists, demandingness, and the impairment argument against abortion.
Crummett D
Bioethics; 2020 Feb; 34(2):214-220. PubMed ID: 31782822
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Why the wrongness of intentionally impairing children
Cushing S
J Med Ethics; 2023 Feb; 49(2):146-147. PubMed ID: 36693707
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The impairment argument for the immorality of abortion revisited.
Blackshaw BP
Bioethics; 2020 Feb; 34(2):211-213. PubMed ID: 31788824
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Against the impairment argument: A reply to Hendricks.
Räsänen J
Bioethics; 2020 Oct; 34(8):862-864. PubMed ID: 32017158
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Fine-tuning the impairment argument.
Blackshaw BP; Hendricks P
J Med Ethics; 2021 Sep; 47(9):641-642. PubMed ID: 33172908
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The parenthood argument.
Simkulet W
Bioethics; 2018 Jan; 32(1):10-15. PubMed ID: 29171657
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. If fetuses are persons, abortion is a public health crisis.
Blackshaw B; Rodger D
Bioethics; 2021 Jun; 35(5):465-472. PubMed ID: 33811355
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The Two tragedies argument.
Simkulet W
J Med Ethics; 2019 May; 45(5):304-308. PubMed ID: 30796091
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Responsibility Arguments in Defence of Abortion: When One is Morally Responsible for the Creation of a Fetus.
Kirschenheiter T
New Bioeth; 2023 Dec; 29(4):340-351. PubMed ID: 37768733
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The Impairment Argument and Future-Like-Ours: A Problematic Dependence.
Bobier C
J Bioeth Inq; 2023 Sep; 20(3):353-357. PubMed ID: 37278912
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Three Problems with the Impairment Argument.
Simkulet W
Asian Bioeth Rev; 2023 Apr; 15(2):169-179. PubMed ID: 37035483
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The inconsistency argument: why apparent pro-life inconsistency undermines opposition to induced abortion.
Simkulet W
J Med Ethics; 2022 Jul; 48(7):461-465. PubMed ID: 34016648
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. My body, still my choice: an objection to Hendricks on abortion.
van Oosterum K
J Med Ethics; 2023 Feb; 49(2):145. PubMed ID: 35906018
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Moral status of the fetus and the permissibility of abortion: a contractarian response to Thomson's violinist thought experiment.
Minehan MJ
J Med Ethics; 2022 Jun; 48(6):407-410. PubMed ID: 33963066
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The impairment argument for the immorality of abortion: A reply.
Blackshaw BP
Bioethics; 2019 Jul; 33(6):723-724. PubMed ID: 30945321
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Killing and Impairing Fetuses.
Singh P
New Bioeth; 2022 Jun; 28(2):127-138. PubMed ID: 35119344
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Even if the fetus is not a person, abortion is immoral: The impairment argument.
Hendricks P
Bioethics; 2019 Feb; 33(2):245-253. PubMed ID: 30480820
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
