Article info
PDFCommentary
Defending superior moral status in pregnancy: a response to commentaries
- Correspondence to Dr Heloise Robinson, University of Oxford Exeter College, Oxford, UK; heloise.robinson{at}exeter.ox.ac.uk
Citation
Defending superior moral status in pregnancy: a response to commentaries
Publication history
- Received October 18, 2023
- Accepted October 25, 2023
- First published November 16, 2023.
Online issue publication
December 14, 2023
Article Versions
- Previous version (14 December 2023).
- 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)) 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Other content recommended for you
- Pregnancy and superior moral status: a proposal for two thresholds of personhood
- Justice for women/gestators: superior personhood or plain old feminism?
- Infanticide and moral consistency
- Infanticide, moral status and moral reasons: the importance of context
- Dotting the I's and crossing the T's: autonomy and/or beneficence? The ‘fetus as a patient’ in maternal–fetal surgery
- Fetuses, newborns, & parental responsibility
- Authority without identity: defending advance directives via posthumous rights over one’s body
- Challenging the principle of proportionality
- Why two arguments from probability fail and one argument from Thomson’s analogy of the violinist succeeds in justifying embryo destruction in some situations
- Why the nuclear option? Supporting pregnant women without new categories of moral status