123 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37607806)
1. Subhumans, human flourishing and abortion: a reply to Räsänen.
Miller C
J Med Ethics; 2023 Aug; ():. PubMed ID: 37607806
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Why a right to life rules out infanticide: A final reply to Räsänen.
Blackshaw BP; Rodger D
Bioethics; 2019 Oct; 33(8):965-967. PubMed ID: 31389040
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. No, pregnancy is not a disease.
Colgrove N; Rodger D
J Med Ethics; 2024 May; ():. PubMed ID: 38749648
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Why arguments against infanticide remain convincing: A reply to Räsänen.
Rodger D; Blackshaw BP; Wilcox C
Bioethics; 2018 Mar; 32(3):215-219. PubMed ID: 29369381
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A dubious defense of 'after-birth abortion': A reply to Räsänen.
Kaczor C
Bioethics; 2018 Feb; 32(2):132-137. PubMed ID: 29171674
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Fetal reduction, moral permissibility and the all or nothing problem.
Wang X
J Med Ethics; 2023 Nov; 49(11):772-775. PubMed ID: 36813549
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Pregnancy, pain and pathology: a reply to Smajdor and Räsänen.
Baron T
J Med Ethics; 2024 May; ():. PubMed ID: 38749653
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Ectogenesis and a right to the death of the prenatal human being: A reply to Räsänen.
Kaczor C
Bioethics; 2018 Nov; 32(9):634-638. PubMed ID: 30252944
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Should vegans have children? A response to Räsänen.
Austin-Eames L
Theor Med Bioeth; 2024 May; ():. PubMed ID: 38740724
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Human equality and the impermissibility of abortion: a response to Bozzo.
Miller C
J Med Ethics; 2024 Feb; 50(3):209-211. PubMed ID: 37979974
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The Moral Significance of Abortion Inconsistency Arguments.
Simkulet W
Asian Bioeth Rev; 2022 Jan; 14(1):41-56. PubMed ID: 34729080
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Against the nihilism of 'legal age change': response to Räsänen.
Saad TC
J Med Ethics; 2019 Jul; 45(7):465-466. PubMed ID: 31092633
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A critique of "the best secular argument against abortion".
Strong C
J Med Ethics; 2008 Oct; 34(10):727-31. PubMed ID: 18827103
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Abortion and the argument from potential: what we owe to the ones who might exist.
Giubilini A
J Med Philos; 2012 Feb; 37(1):49-59. PubMed ID: 22241864
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Is ageing still undesirable? A reply to Räsänen.
García-Barranquero P; Llorca Albareda J; Díaz-Cobacho G
J Med Ethics; 2024 May; 50(6):427-428. PubMed ID: 37845013
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. What a drag it is getting old: a response to Räsänen.
Brassington I
J Med Ethics; 2019 Jul; 45(7):467-468. PubMed ID: 31217229
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Abortion and the basis of equality: a reply to Miller.
Bozzo A
J Med Ethics; 2024 Feb; 50(3):207-208. PubMed ID: 36858812
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. There is no right to the death of the fetus.
Hendricks P
Bioethics; 2018 Jul; 32(6):395-397. PubMed ID: 29883519
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Responding to Simkulet's objections to the two tragedies argument.
Friberg-Fernros H
J Med Ethics; 2020 Mar; 46(3):223-224. PubMed ID: 31699810
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
