HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER		Author Keyword(s) Vol Page [Advanced]

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this link to a friend Similar articles in this journal Add article to my folders Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Search for Related Content

In the article by Epstein (J Med Ethics 2007;33:473–4) there were several errors, which are listed below.

page 473, column 1: "Rather, the debate will remain focused on the orthodox bioethical arguments..."

page 473, column 2: "Free, uncoerced, people..."

page 473, column 2: "It is true that some forms of coercion are, like the dilemma they impose on people, simply tragic."

page 473, column 2: "the prospect of having to choose, autonomously or non-autonomously, ... "

page 473, column 3: "Well, it does."

page 473, column 3: "After all, people see their labour power as an alternative to abject poverty only because they are deprived of the freedom to sell the products of their own labour (or that of others).

Acknowledgements: "Thanks to Professor Len Doyal for his comments on early drafts of this paper."doi: 10.1136/jme.2006.017855corr1