Skip to main content
We use cookies to improve our service and to tailor our content and advertising to you.
More info
You can manage your cookie settings via your browser at any time. To learn more about how we use cookies, please see our
cookies policy
.
Subscribe
Log In
More
Log in via Institution
Log in via OpenAthens
Log in using your username and password
For personal accounts OR managers of institutional accounts
Username
*
Password
*
Forgot your log in details?
Register a new account?
Forgot
your user name or password?
Basket
Search
More
Search for this keyword
Advanced search
Latest content
Current issue
Archive
Authors
About
Search for this keyword
Advanced search
Close
More
Main menu
Latest content
Current issue
Archive
Authors
About
Subscribe
Log in
More
Log in via Institution
Log in via OpenAthens
Log in using your username and password
For personal accounts OR managers of institutional accounts
Username
*
Password
*
Forgot your log in details?
Register a new account?
Forgot
your user name or password?
BMJ Journals
More
You are here
Home
Online First
Online First
Email Alert
Online First
March 14, 2019
Original research
The biobank consent debate: why ‘meta-consent’ is still the solution!
Thomas
Ploug
,
Soren
Holm
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2018-105258
Response
The need for feasible compromises on conscientious objection: response to Card
Aaron J
Ancell
,
Walter
Sinnott-Armstrong
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2019-105425
Original research
Moral case for legal age change
Joona
Räsänen
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2018-105294
March 12, 2019
Response
The moral argument for heritable genome editing requires an inappropriately deterministic view of genetics
Rachel
Horton
,
Anneke M
Lucassen
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2019-105390
Current Controversy
‘I just need an opiate refill to get me through the weekend’
Eric
Yan
,
Dennis John
Kuo
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2018-105099
Commentary
Taxonomy of justifications for consent waivers: When and why are public views relevant?
Angela
Ballantyne
,
G Owen
Scaefer
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2018-105318
Neuroethics
Canadian neurosurgeons’ views on medical assistance in dying (MAID): a cross-sectional survey of Canadian Neurosurgical Society (CNSS) members
Alwalaa
Althagafi
,
Chris
Ekong
,
Brian W
Wheelock
,
Richard
Moulton
,
Peter
Gorman
,
Kesh
Reddy
,
Sean
Christie
,
Ian
Fleetwood
,
Sean
Barry
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2018-105160
March 07, 2019
Viewpoint
Smoking and hospitalisation: harnessing medical ethics and harm reduction
Kimberly
Sue
,
Dinah
Applewhite
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2018-105065
Original research
Differential payment to research participants in the same study: an ethical analysis
Govind
Persad
,
Holly
Fernandez Lynch
,
Emily
Largent
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2018-105140
March 06, 2019
Original research
We don’t need unilateral DNRs: taking informed non-dissent one step further
Diego
Real de Asúa
,
Katarina
Lee
,
Peter
Koch
,
Inmaculada
de Melo-Martín
,
Trevor
Bibler
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2018-105305
March 02, 2019
Student essay
Is it just semantics? Medical students and their ‘first patients’
Natalie
Cohen
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2017-104306
March 01, 2019
Extended essay
Should the deceased be listed as authors?
Gert
Helgesson
,
William
Bülow
,
Stefan
Eriksson
,
Tove E.
Godskesen
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2018-105304
February 28, 2019
Response
Goldilocks and the two principles. A response to Gyngell
et al
Peter
Mills
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2019-105395
February 25, 2019
Original research
Informed consent for functional MRI research on comatose patients following severe brain injury: balancing the social benefits of research against patient autonomy
Tommaso
Bruni
,
Mackenzie
Graham
,
Loretta
Norton
,
Teneille
Gofton
,
Adrian M
Owen
,
Charles
Weijer
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2018-104867
Brief report
Uterus transplantation in women who are genetically XY
Amani
Sampson
,
Laura L.
Kimberly
,
Kara N.
Goldman
,
David L.
Keefe
,
Gwendolyn P.
Quinn
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2018-105222
February 22, 2019
Response
Equity and preventive regulations
Elizabeth
Fenton
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2019-105352
Original research
The Two tragedies argument
William
Simkulet
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2018-105145
February 18, 2019
Response
What are considered ‘good facts’?
Akira
Akabayashi
,
Eisuke
Nakazawa
,
Nancy S
Jecker
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2018-105333
Original research
Ethics of Incongruity: moral tension generators in clinical medicine
Nicholas
Kontos
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2018-105161
February 16, 2019
Response
In response to Ballantyne and Schaefer’s ‘Consent and the ethical duty to participate in health data research’
Nilay
Hepgul
,
Katherine E
Sleeman
,
Alice M
Firth
,
Anna
Johnston
,
James T H
Teo
,
William
Bernal
,
Richard J B
Dobson
,
Irene J
Higginson
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2018-105271
Original research
Does One Health require a novel ethical framework?
Jane
Johnson
,
Chris
Degeling
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2018-105043
Response
Meeting the Epicurean challenge: a reply to Christensen
Bruce P.
Blackshaw
,
Daniel
Rodger
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2018-105267
February 14, 2019
Extended essay
It is never lawful or ethical to withdraw life-sustaining treatment from patients with prolonged disorders of consciousness
Charles
Foster
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2018-105250
February 11, 2019
Student essay
Is it ethical to provide IVF add-ons when there is no evidence of a benefit if the patient requests it?
Mila Stefanova
Zemyarska
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2018-104983
February 08, 2019
Response
In response to an argument against penile transplantation
André
Van der Merwe
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2018-104795
January 24, 2019
Feature article
Moral reasons to edit the human genome: picking up from the Nuffield report
Christopher
Gyngell
,
Hilary
Bowman-Smart
,
Julian
Savulescu
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2018-105084
Original research
‘Is it better not to know certain things?’: views of women who have undergone non-invasive prenatal testing on its possible future applications
Hilary
Bowman-Smart
,
Julian
Savulescu
,
Cara
Mand
,
Christopher
Gyngell
,
Mark D
Pertile
,
Sharon
Lewis
,
Martin B
Delatycki
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2018-105167
January 11, 2019
Response
A rebuttal to Akabayashi and colleagues’ criticisms of the iPSC stock project
Misao
Fujita
,
Keiichi
Tabuchi
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2018-105248
January 10, 2019
Extended essay
Blameworthy bumping? Investigating nudge’s neglected cousin
Ainar
Miyata-Sturm
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2018-105179
Original research
No going back? Reversibility and why it matters for deep brain stimulation
Jonathan
Pugh
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2018-105139
December 22, 2018
Extended essay
Authority without identity: defending advance directives via posthumous rights over one’s body
Govind
Persad
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2018-104971
November 21, 2018
Response
‘Yes’ to mitochondrial replacement techniques and lesbian motherhood: a reply to Françoise Baylis
César
Palacios-González
,
Giulia
Cavaliere
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2018-105060
November 14, 2018
Student essay
Pink and blue: the role of gender in psychiatric diagnosis
George
Gillett
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2018-105042
October 30, 2018
Extended essay
Obesity, equity and choice
Timothy M
Wilkinson
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2018-104848
October 01, 2018
Original research
The biobank consent debate: Why ‘meta-consent’ is not the solution?
Neil C
Manson
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2018-105007
September 21, 2018
Response
Conscientious objection to referrals
Thomas
Finegan
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2018-105067
September 04, 2018
Original research
Forced caesareans: applying ordinary standards to an extraordinary case
Hafez
Ismaili M’hamdi
,
Inez
de Beaufort
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2018-104828
August 22, 2018
Response
Notes on substantance in orthodox theory: a reply to Badano
William R
Smith
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2018-105030
June 13, 2018
Reproductive ethics
A surrogate’s secrets are(n’t) safe with me: patient confidentiality in the care of a gestational surrogate
Claire
Horner
,
Paul
Burcher
doi:
10.1136/medethics-2017-104518
