Response to “Abortion and Assent” by Rosamond Rhodes (CQ Vol 8, No 4) and “Abortion, Disability, Assent, and Consent” by Matti Häyry (CQ Vol 10, No 1): Assent and Selective Abortion: A Response to Rhodes and Häyry

It is now a widely shared opinion in the Western countries that a child's disability would probably place an unexpected burden on her parents, a burden that the parents have not committed themselves to dealing with. A child with a physical or mental disability is not, so to speak, a part of the...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Vehmas, Simo (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: Cambridge Univ. Press 2001
In: Cambridge quarterly of healthcare ethics
Year: 2001, Volume: 10, Issue: 4, Pages: 433-440
Online Access: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Description
Summary:It is now a widely shared opinion in the Western countries that a child's disability would probably place an unexpected burden on her parents, a burden that the parents have not committed themselves to dealing with. A child with a physical or mental disability is not, so to speak, a part of the package the parents ordered. This line of reasoning has recently been supported by Rosamond Rhodes in her article “Abortion and Assent.”
ISSN:1469-2147
Contains:Enthalten in: Cambridge quarterly of healthcare ethics
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1017/S0963180101004108