Article Text
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Deborah Kirklin discusses the role of medical imaging in the abortion debate
The latest developments in fetal ultrasound technology, made public by a group called Create,1 and first introduced to the wider UK public by the Evening Standard newspaper reporter Isabel Oakeshott in September 2003 and again in July 2004, have evoked a flood of responses from the public, pro-life and pro-choice campaigners, and politicians, re-igniting the debate about abortion in the UK and elsewhere. The focus of the Evening Standard articles, on the smiling, walking, and waving babies that the images purport to show, was echoed throughout the worldwide media coverage that followed. In July 2004, Sir David Steel, sponsor of the 1967 Abortion Act, publicly stated that the Create images led him to believe it was time to review the legal time limit for abortions. Prime Minister Tony Blair said he considered calls for such a review reasonable.
What interests me here is the powerful role that biomedical imaging, and the human artifice it involves, can play in influencing the nature, timing, and tone …
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Abortion and Ectogenesis: Moral Compromise
- Where do we draw the line?
- Medical students’ attitudes towards abortion: a UK study
- The place for individual conscience
- Conscientious objection and healthcare in the UK: why tribunals are not the answer
- Issues for service providers: a response to points raised
- The new ethics of abortion
- Critical notice—Defending life: a moral and legal case against abortion choice by Francis J Beckwith
- A future like ours revisited
- We’re horrified by the rejection of Roe v Wade—but abortion is not a universal right in the UK