Article info
PDFCommentary
Partial ectogenesis: freedom, equality and political perspective
- Correspondence to Elizabeth Chloe Romanis, Centre for Social Ethics and Policy, University of Manchester Manchester School of Law, Manchester M13 9PL, UK; elizabeth.romanis{at}manchester.ac.uk
Citation
Partial ectogenesis: freedom, equality and political perspective
Publication history
- Received December 18, 2019
- Accepted January 13, 2020
- First published February 3, 2020.
Online issue publication
February 07, 2020
Article Versions
- Previous version (7 February 2020).
- You are viewing the most recent version of this article.
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
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Other content recommended for you
- Gestation, equality and freedom: ectogenesis as a political perspective
- Impact of ectogenesis on the medicalisation of pregnancy and childbirth
- Willing mothers: ectogenesis and the role of gestational motherhood
- Artificial wombs, birth and ‘birth’: a response to Romanis
- Artificial womb technology and the frontiers of human reproduction: conceptual differences and potential implications
- Subjects of ectogenesis: are ‘gestatelings’ fetuses, newborns or neither?
- Artificial womb technology and the significance of birth: why gestatelings are not newborns (or fetuses)
- Commentary on ‘Gestation, Equality and Freedom: Ectogenesis as a Political Perspective’
- Abortion and Ectogenesis: Moral Compromise
- Gender, gestation and ectogenesis: self-determination for pregnant people ahead of artificial wombs