Responses
Ethics
Paper
Harris, harmed states, and sexed bodies
Compose a Response to This Article
Other responses
Jump to comment:
- Published on: 18 May 2017
- Published on: 18 May 2017Harris, Sparrow and "rational" genetic conclusionsShow More
In his spirited response to Robin Sparrow (J Med Ethics, 37:5), John Harris insists he is ...misunderstood. "No sane person", he writes, "would recommend the exclusive production of females as a reproductive method of choice".
Nor, of course, does Sparrow whose point was that the eugenic enthusiasms of Harris and others for genetic selection, and the elimination of "harmful" choices, leads to positions no sane p...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared.
Other content recommended for you
- Extending preimplantation genetic diagnosis: medical and non-medical uses
- The inference from a single case: moral versus scientific inferences in implementing new biotechnologies
- Just diagnosis? Preimplantation genetic diagnosis and injustices to disabled people
- Sparrows, hedgehogs and castrati: reflections on gender and enhancement
- Britain’s new preimplantation tissue typing policy: an ethical defence
- Preimplantation genetic diagnosis and rational choice under risk or uncertainty
- Fear of a female planet: how John Harris came to endorse eugenic social engineering
- Bach to the future: response to: Extending preimplantation genetic diagnosis: medical and non-medical uses
- Sex selection for social purposes in Israel: quest for the “perfect child” of a particular gender or centuries old prejudice against women?
- Sexism and human enhancement