Article info
PDFAuthor meets critics: response
Dignity's steer, dignity's subjects, dignity's synonyms? Three questions for dignity's supporter(s)
- Correspondence to Professor Richard Huxtable, Centre for Ethics in Medicine, School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, UK; R.Huxtable{at}bristol.ac.uk
Citation
Dignity's steer, dignity's subjects, dignity's synonyms? Three questions for dignity's supporter(s)
Publication history
- Received March 5, 2015
- Accepted April 2, 2015
- First published April 17, 2015.
Online issue publication
April 27, 2016
Article Versions
- Previous version (27 April 2016).
- You are viewing the most recent version of this article.
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://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/
Other content recommended for you
- Whose dignity? Resolving ambiguities in the scope of “human dignity” in the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights
- Human dignity: a response to Camosy and Huxtable
- Dignity is a useless concept
- Ethical rhetoric: genomics and the moral content of UNESCO’s “universal” declarations
- What moral work can Nussbaum’s account of human dignity do in the context of dementia care?
- What constitutional protection for freedom of scientific research?
- Reproductive and therapeutic cloning, germline therapy, and purchase of gametes and embryos: comments on Canadian legislation governing reproduction technologies
- Thalamic proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy in vegetative state induced by traumatic brain injury
- Making sense of dignity
- Current controversies and irresolvable disagreement: the case of Vincent Lambert and the role of ‘dissensus’