Article info
PDFOriginal research
Conventional revolution: the ethical implications of the natural progress of neonatal intensive care to artificial wombs
- Correspondence to Phillip Stefan Wozniak, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus 43210, Ohio, USA; phillip.wozniak{at}osumc.edu
Citation
Conventional revolution: the ethical implications of the natural progress of neonatal intensive care to artificial wombs
Publication history
- Received July 29, 2020
- Revised October 8, 2020
- Accepted October 13, 2020
- First published November 18, 2020.
Online issue publication
January 07, 2022
Article Versions
- Previous version (7 January 2022).
- 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)) 2021. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Other content recommended for you
- Artificial womb technology and the frontiers of human reproduction: conceptual differences and potential implications
- Clinical challenges to the concept of ectogestation
- Regulating abortion after ectogestation
- In defence of newborns: a response to Kingma
- Gestaticide: killing the subject of the artificial womb
- Artificial wombs, birth and ‘birth’: a response to Romanis
- Artificial womb technology and the significance of birth: why gestatelings are not newborns (or fetuses)
- Subjects of ectogenesis: are ‘gestatelings’ fetuses, newborns or neither?
- Reviewing the womb
- Retrospective cohort study of all deaths among infants born between 22 and 27 completed weeks of gestation in Switzerland over a 3-year period