David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Medical Ethics 22 (6):327-333 (1996)
In the UK in October 1992, Mrs S was forced to have a caesarean section despite her objections to such a procedure on religious grounds. The case once again called into question the obligations of women to the unborn, and also whether one person can be forced to undergo a medical procedure for the benefit of someone else. Re S, like the case of Angela Carder, is often discussed in terms of the conflict between maternal and fetal rights. This paper looks instead at our obligations to save life in general-whether or not we are pregnant- and at the obligations of mothers to their children-whether they are born or unborn. Drawing on Judith Jarvis Thomson's distinction, it argues that minimal decency informs the duties which are owed to strangers, but that parents can be expected to behave as Good Samaritans towards their children. Finally, it is argued that even if mothers are ethically obliged to consent to caesarean sections which will save the lives of their babies, this does not necessarily mean that others are at liberty, or even obliged, to proceed with such operations without their consent
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Sahin Aksoy (2001). Antenatal Screening and its Possible Meaning From Unborn Baby's Perspective. BMC Medical Ethics 2 (1):1-11.
A. Pearce (2012). Women Requesting Caesareans: Ethical Implications in Light of the New National Institute for Clinical Excellence Guidelines. Clinical Ethics 7 (4):161-165.
P. de Zulueta & M. Boulton (2007). Routine Antenatal HIV Testing: The Responses and Perceptions of Pregnant Women and the Viability of Informed Consent. A Qualitative Study. Journal of Medical Ethics 33 (6):329-336.
Catherine Mckeen (2006). Why Women Must Guard and Rule in Plato's Kallipolis. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 87 (4):527–548.
Ronald J. Burke (1997). Women on Corporate Boards of Directors: A Needed Resource. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 16 (9):909-915.
Dallas Cullen (1990). Career Barriers: Do We Need More Research? [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 9 (4-5):353 - 359.
Lisa Campo-Engelstein (2011). No More Larking Around! Why We Need Male LARCs. Hastings Center Report 41 (5):22-26.
T. D. Campbell & A. J. M. McKay (1978). Antenatal Injury and the Rights of the Foetus. Philosophical Quarterly 28 (110):17-30.
D. R. Bromham (1993). Antenatal Diagnosis of Fetal Abnormalities. Journal of Medical Ethics 19 (1):62-63.
Elisabeth Porter (1994). Abortion Ethics: Rights and Responsibilities. Hypatia 9 (3):66 - 87.
Rebecca Kukla (2006). Ethics and Ideology in Breastfeeding Advocacy Campaigns. Hypatia 21 (1):157-181.
Robin Attfield (2009). Non-Reciprocal Responsibilities and the Banquet of the Kingdom. Journal of Global Ethics 5 (1):33 – 42.
Arménio Rego, Susana Leal & Miguel Cunha (2011). Rethinking the Employees' Perceptions of Corporate Citizenship Dimensionalization. Journal of Business Ethics 104 (2):207-218.
R. Bennett (2007). Routine Antenatal HIV Testing and Informed Consent: An Unworkable Marriage? Journal of Medical Ethics 33 (8):446-448.
Added to index2010-09-13
Total downloads53 ( #76,384 of 1,789,999 )
Recent downloads (6 months)7 ( #122,579 of 1,789,999 )
How can I increase my downloads?