Article Text
Abstract
In the article ‘After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?’ arguments are made in favour of the moral permissibility of intentionally killing newborn infants, under particular conditions. Here we argue that their arguments are based on an indefensible view of personhood, and we question the logic of harm and interest that informs their arguments. Furthermore, we argue that the conclusions here are so contrary to ordinary moral intuitions that the argument and conclusions based upon it—including those which defend more mainstream methods of abortion—should be treated with immediate suspicion.
- Abortion
- Embryos and Fetuses
- Children
Statistics from Altmetric.com
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:
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Fetuses, newborns, & parental responsibility
- Of course the baby should live: against ‘ after - birth abortion ’
- Potentials and burdens: a reply to Giubilini and Minerva
- Limitations on personhood arguments for abortion and ‘ after - birth abortion ’
- Yes, the baby should live: a pro-choice response to Giubilini and Minerva
- Infanticide: a reply to Giubilini and Minerva
- Dilemma for appeals to the moral significance of birth
- The common premise for uncommon conclusions
- Abortion, infanticide and moral context
- Killing fetuses and killing newborns