Article info
PDFCommentary
Doctors should be morally common: a reply to Rosamond Rhodes
- Correspondence to Professor Charles Foster, Faculty of Law, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3UL, UK; Charles.Foster{at}gtc.ox.ac.uk
Citation
Doctors should be morally common: a reply to Rosamond Rhodes
Publication history
- Received October 2, 2019
- Accepted October 17, 2019
- First published October 31, 2019.
Online issue publication
December 06, 2019
Article Versions
- Previous version (6 December 2019).
- 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)) 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Other content recommended for you
- ‘Rethinking “Disease”: a fresh diagnosis and a new philosophical treatment’
- Is moral bioenhancement dangerous?
- The justificatory power of moral experience
- Whose dignity? Resolving ambiguities in the scope of “human dignity” in the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights
- Does the rejection of wrongful life claims rely on a conceptual error?
- The Judgment of the German Federal Constitutional Court regarding assisted suicide: a template for pluralistic states?
- A waste of time: the problem of common morality in Principles of Biomedical Ethics
- The ethics of and the appropriate legislation concerning killing people and letting them die: a response to Merkel
- Making sense of dignity
- Killing or letting die? Proposal of a (somewhat) new answer to a perennial question.