Article info
PDFReproduction
Are those who subscribe to the view that early embryos are persons irrational and inconsistent? A reply to Brock
- Correspondence to: J Deckers Institute of Health and Society, The Medical School, Leech Building, University of Newcastle, Newcastle-upon-Tyne NE2 4HH, UK;jan.deckers{at}ncl.ac.uk
Citation
Are those who subscribe to the view that early embryos are persons irrational and inconsistent? A reply to Brock
Publication history
- Received September 4, 2006
- Accepted September 22, 2006
- First published January 30, 2007.
Online issue publication
April 27, 2016
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
Copyright 2007 by the Journal of Medical Ethics
Other content recommended for you
- Why two arguments from probability fail and one argument from Thomson’s analogy of the violinist succeeds in justifying embryo destruction in some situations
- Genetic enhancement, post-persons and moral status: a reply to Buchanan
- Is a consensus possible on stem cell research? Moral and political obstacles
- Moral uncertainty and the farming of human-pig chimeras
- Infanticide and moral consistency
- Stem cell-derived embryo models: moral advance or moral obfuscation?
- Cursed lamp: the problem of spontaneous abortion
- In defence of newborns: a response to Kingma
- Human embryonic stem cell research debates: a Confucian argument
- In defence of gestatelings: response to Colgrove