Article info
Response
Paper
Of course the baby should live: against ‘after-birth abortion’
- Correspondence to Dr Regina A Rini, Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, University of Oxford, Suite 8, Littlegate House, St Ebbe's St, Oxford OX1 1PT, UK; regina.rini{at}philosophy.ox.ac.uk
Citation
Of course the baby should live: against ‘after-birth abortion’
Publication history
- Received March 7, 2012
- Revised May 30, 2012
- Accepted January 29, 2013
- First published May 1, 2013.
Online issue publication
May 01, 2013
Request permissions
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Copyright information
Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions
Other content recommended for you
- Fetuses, newborns, & parental responsibility
- Yes, the baby should live: a pro-choice response to Giubilini and Minerva
- Personhood, harm and interest: a reply to Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva
- Dilemma for appeals to the moral significance of birth
- Potentials and burdens: a reply to Giubilini and Minerva
- Abortion, infanticide and moral context
- Limitations on personhood arguments for abortion and ‘after-birth abortion’
- Infanticide: a reply to Giubilini and Minerva
- After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?
- Philosophy, critical thinking and ‘after-birth abortion: why should the baby live?’