Responses
Other responses
Jump to comment:
- Published on: 14 October 2013
- Published on: 14 October 2013
- Published on: 14 October 2013Response to KochShow More
Mr Koch is mistaken about the question of whether the Report by the Royal Society of Canada expert panel that I chaired was peer reviewed. It was extensively externally peer reviewed.
As to the journal's purported refusal to publish criticisms of the Report. We received only one request to publish an article critical of the Report. The author of said paper requested not only that we accept his manuscript without...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared. - Published on: 14 October 2013Re: Journals and "academic FreedomShow More
in his recent article Bioethics Journal editor Udo Sch?klenk speaks grandly about academic freedom and bioethical journals "under seige". And yet, academic freedom and honesty must go together. His journal's website carries under a "new" banner a link to the 2012 Royal Society Expert Panel report on End of Life Decision Making. Mr. Sch?klenk was a principal author of this report. The report was not peer reviewed. Request...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared.
Other content recommended for you
- Authorship policies of bioethics journals
- Infanticide and madness
- Infanticide: a reply to Giubilini and Minerva
- The Olivieri debacle: where were the heroes of bioethics
- The common premise for uncommon conclusions
- The Italian reaction to the Giubilini and Minerva paper
- Introduction to The Olivieri symposium
- Better governance in academic health sciences centres: moving beyond the Olivieri / Apotex Affair in Toronto
- Abortion, infanticide and allowing babies to die, 40 years on
- Writings on an Ethical Life