Reply to Lebech or the ontological humility of the lawyer faced with philosophical consistency.
Replying to the criticisms of Lebech, the author tries, regarding the issue of embryo research, to draw a line between what could be an international legal approach and what is a philosophical ontological quest. It is then up to the reader to decide if, and how far, these two different approaches can be complementary.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
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.
Other content recommended for you
- How reproductive and regenerative medicine meet in a Chinese fertility clinic. Interviews with women about the donation of embryos to stem cell research
- Going high and low: on pluralism and neutrality in human embryology policy-making
- Two kinds of embryo research: four case examples
- The human embryo in the Christian tradition: a reconsideration
- Double-effect reasoning and the conception of human embryos
- What is nature capable of? Evidence, ontology and speculative medical humanities
- Creating and sacrificing embryos for stem cells
- Stem cell stories: from bedside to bench
- The Human Embryo Research Debates: Bioethics in the Vortex of Controversy
- Reproductive and therapeutic cloning, germline therapy, and purchase of gametes and embryos: comments on Canadian legislation governing reproduction technologies