Article info
PDFExtended essay
Clinicians’ criteria for fetal moral status: viability and relationality, not sentience
- Correspondence to Dr Lisa Campo-Engelstein, UTMB, Galveston, Texas, USA; licampoe{at}utmb.edu
Citation
Clinicians’ criteria for fetal moral status: viability and relationality, not sentience
Publication history
- Received May 5, 2022
- Accepted October 18, 2022
- First published November 8, 2022.
Online issue publication
August 21, 2024
Article Versions
- Previous version (8 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)) 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Other content recommended for you
- Is there a ‘new ethics of abortion’?
- Pregnancy and superior moral status: a proposal for two thresholds of personhood
- In defence of newborns: a response to Kingma
- Challenging the principle of proportionality
- Dotting the I's and crossing the T's: autonomy and/or beneficence? The ‘fetus as a patient’ in maternal–fetal surgery
- Conscientious commitment, professional obligations and abortion provision after the reversal of Roe v Wade
- Moral uncertainty and the farming of human-pig chimeras
- Infanticide and moral consistency
- Abortion and Ectogenesis: Moral Compromise
- Genetic enhancement, post-persons and moral status: a reply to Buchanan