Article info
Response
Resource expenditure not resource allocation: response to McDougall on cloning and dignity
- M J Williams, Student Recruitment, Admissions and International Development, University of Manchester, Rutherford Building, Coupland Street, Manchester, M13 9PL; myfanwy.williams{at}manchester.ac.uk
Citation
Resource expenditure not resource allocation: response to McDougall on cloning and dignity
Publication history
- Received May 20, 2008
- Revised November 16, 2008
- Accepted December 19, 2008
- First published April 30, 2009.
Online issue publication
April 30, 2009
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
2009 BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and the Institute of Medical Ethics
Other content recommended for you
- Reproductive and therapeutic cloning, germline therapy, and purchase of gametes and embryos: comments on Canadian legislation governing reproduction technologies
- What exactly is an exact copy? And why it matters when trying to ban human reproductive cloning in Australia
- Just another reproductive technology? The ethics of human reproductive cloning as an experimental medical procedure
- Reproductive cloning in humans and therapeutic cloning in primates: is the ethical debate catching up with the recent scientific advances?
- Is a consensus possible on stem cell research? Moral and political obstacles
- The significance of induced pluripotent stem cells for basic research and clinical therapy
- A resource-based version of the argument that cloning is an affront to human dignity
- What’s in a name? Embryos, entities, and ANTities in the stem cell debate
- Why the apparent haste to clone humans?
- Research ethics and lessons from Hwanggate: what can we learn from the Korean cloning fraud?