David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Hastings Center Report 37 (2):16-20 (2007)
The story of Ashley, a nine-year-old from Seattle, has caused a good deal of controversy since it appeared in the Los Angeles Times on January 3, 2007.1 Ashley was born with a condition called static encephalopathy, a severe brain impairment that leaves her unable to walk, talk, eat, sit up, or roll over. According to her doctors, Ashley has reached, and will remain at, the developmental level of a three-month-old.
|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
Eva Feder Kittay (2011). Forever Small: The Strange Case of Ashley X. Hypatia 26 (3):610-631.
B. Cox-White & S. F. Boxall (2008). Redefining Disability: Maleficent, Unjust and Inconsistent. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 33 (6):558-576.
Ian R. Holzman (2010). Commentary: Calibrating the Moral Compass. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 19 (3):411-413.
Similar books and articles
Ferdinand Schoeman (1985). Parental Discretion and Children's Rights: Background and Implications for Medical Decision-Making. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 10 (1):45-62.
Ruchika Mishra (2010). The Case: The “Ashley Treatment” Revisited. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 19 (3):407.
N. Tan & I. Brassington (2009). Agency, Duties and the "Ashley Treatment". Journal of Medical Ethics 35 (11):658-661.
Farah Focquaert (2013). Deep Brain Stimulation in Children: Parental Authority Versus Shared Decision-Making. Neuroethics 6 (3):447-455.
S. D. Edwards (2008). The Ashley Treatment: A Step Too Far, or Not Far Enough? Journal of Medical Ethics 34 (5):341-343.
Merle Spriggs (2010). Ashley's Interests Were Not Violated Because She Does Not Have the Necessary Interests. American Journal of Bioethics 10 (1):52-54.
Hugh Dalton (1914). Book Review:Gold and Prices. W. J. Ashley; Environment and Efficiency. M. H. Thomson; The Social Policy of Bismarck. Annie Ashley. [REVIEW] Ethics 24 (2):246-.
S. Matthew Liao, Julian Savulescu & Mark Sheehan (2007). The Ashley Treatment: Best Interests, Convenience, and Parental Decision Making. Hastings Center Report 37 (2):16-20.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads19 ( #185,723 of 1,790,293 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #322,106 of 1,790,293 )
How can I increase my downloads?