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.
149 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36635972)
61. When does potentiality count? A comment on Lockwood. Hare RM Bioethics; 1988 Jul; 2(3):214-26. PubMed ID: 11659015 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
62. Disability, humanity, and personhood: a survey of moral concepts. Ralston DC; Ho J J Med Philos; 2007; 32(6):619-33. PubMed ID: 18027251 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
63. The elimination of morality. Harris J J Med Ethics; 1995 Aug; 21(4):220-4. PubMed ID: 7473641 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
64. The Golden Rule and the potentiality principle: future persons and contingent interests. Chan KM J Appl Philos; 2004; 21(1):33-42. PubMed ID: 15148950 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
65. Chronic vegetative states: intrinsic value of biological process. Freer JP J Med Philos; 1984 Nov; 9(4):395-407. PubMed ID: 6512438 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
66. Owning up to our agendas: on the role and limits of science in debates about embryos and brain death. Khushf G J Law Med Ethics; 2006; 34(1):58-76, 4. PubMed ID: 16489985 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
67. The ethics of embryo research. Singer P; Kuhse H Law Med Health Care; 1986 Sep; 14(3-4):133-8. PubMed ID: 3645221 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
68. The differentiation argument: If newborns outrank animals, so do fetuses. Blanchette K Bioethics; 2021 Feb; 35(2):207-213. PubMed ID: 32583546 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
69. Abortion and Ectogenesis: Moral Compromise. Simkulet W J Med Ethics; 2020 Feb; 46(2):93-98. PubMed ID: 31537616 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
70. The role of philosophy in the contemporary abortion debate. Kortiansky P Christ Bioeth; 2004; 10(1):63-7. PubMed ID: 15675038 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
71. Abortion, infanticide, and the asymmetric value of human life. Reiman J J Soc Philos; 1996; 27(3):181-200. PubMed ID: 15069941 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
72. A dualist analysis of abortion: personhood and the concept of self qua experiential subject. Himma KE J Med Ethics; 2005 Jan; 31(1):48-55. PubMed ID: 15634753 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
73. The Confucian concept of human dignity and its implications for bioethics. Li Y Dev World Bioeth; 2022 Mar; 22(1):23-33. PubMed ID: 33719125 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
74. Doubts about a classic defence of abortion. Difford J Hum Reprod Genet Ethics; 2011; 17(1):122-9. PubMed ID: 23350221 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
75. Sensationalized philosophy: a reply to Marquis's "Why abortion is immoral. Cudd AE J Philos; 1990 May; 87(5):262-4. PubMed ID: 11782095 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
76. Miscarriage, Abortion, and Disease. Waters T J Med Philos; 2023 May; 48(3):243-251. PubMed ID: 37078977 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
77. Justifying the rights of pregnancy: the interest view. Marquis D Crim Justice Ethics; 1994; 13(1):67-81. PubMed ID: 11656383 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
78. Personhood and human embryos and fetuses. Tauer CA J Med Philos; 1985 Aug; 10(3):253-66. PubMed ID: 4045333 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
79. Jewish theological and moral reflections on genetic screening: the case of BRCA1. Dorff EN Health Matrix Clevel; 1997; 7(1):65-96. PubMed ID: 10167179 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
80. Why the nuclear option? Supporting pregnant women without new categories of moral status. Rea JB J Med Ethics; 2023 Dec; 50(1):20-21. PubMed ID: 37845012 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]