Article info
PDFCommentary
Commentary on Romanis’ Assisted Gestative Technologies
- Correspondence to Dr Evie Kendal, School of Health Sciences, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia; ekendal{at}swin.edu.au
Citation
Commentary on Romanis’ Assisted Gestative Technologies
Publication history
- Received June 7, 2022
- Accepted June 7, 2022
- First published June 20, 2022.
Online issue publication
November 16, 2022
Article Versions
- Previous version (16 November 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)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Other content recommended for you
- Uterus transplantation: ethical and regulatory challenges
- How useful is the category of ‘assisted gestative technologies’?
- Framing gestation: assistance, delegation, and beyond
- Willing mothers: ectogenesis and the role of gestational motherhood
- Assisted gestative technologies
- Should uterus transplants be publicly funded?
- Reviewing the womb
- Assisted gestative technologies, or on treating unlike cases alike
- Perinatal outcome of singletons and twins after assisted conception: a systematic review of controlled studies
- Clinical challenges to the concept of ectogestation