51 found
Sort by:
  1. Carson Strong & Kathy Kinlaw (forthcoming). Case Studies: Maternal Rights, Fetal Harms. Hastings Center Report.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Carson Strong (2014). A Few More Comments on Common Morality, Noting Some Points of Agreement. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 23 (1):103-104.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Carson Strong (2014). Kukla's Argument Against Common Morality as a Set of Precepts. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 23 (1):93-99.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Carson Strong (2011). Minimal Risk in Research Involving Pregnant Women and Fetuses. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 39 (3):529-538.
    The concept of minimal risk plays a key role in federal regulations on the protection of human research subjects. Although there has been considerable discussion of the meaning of minimal risk, the question of how this concept should be interpreted in research involving pregnant women and fetuses has not been addressed. This essay reviews the literature on minimal risk and argues for an interpretation of that concept in the context of research involving pregnant women and fetuses.
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Carson Strong (2011). Moral Status and the Fetus: Continuation of a Dialogue. American Journal of Bioethics 11 (5):52-54.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Carson Strong (2011). Why Public Policy on Embryo Research Should Not Be Based on Religion. American Journal of Bioethics 11 (3):33-35.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Carson Strong (2010). Theoretical and Practical Problems with Wide Reflective Equilibrium in Bioethics. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 31 (2):123-140.
    Various theories have been put forward in an attempt to explain what makes moral judgments justifiable. One of the main theories currently advocated in bioethics is a form of coherentism known as wide reflective equilibrium. In this paper, I argue that wide reflective equilibrium is not a satisfactory approach for justifying moral beliefs and propositions. A long-standing theoretical problem for reflective equilibrium has not been adequately resolved, and, as a result, the main arguments for wide reflective equilibrium are unsuccessful. Moreover, (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Carson Strong (2010). Why Academic Medical Centers Should Ban Drug Company Gifts to Individuals. American Journal of Bioethics 10 (1):13-15.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Carson Strong (2009). Exploring Questions About Common Morality. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 30 (1):1-9.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Carson Strong (2008). Cloning and Adoption: A Reply to Levy and Lotz. Bioethics 22 (2):130–136.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Carson Strong (2008). Do Embryonic “Patients” Have Moral Interests? American Journal of Bioethics 8 (7):40 – 42.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Carson Strong (2008). Justifying Group-Specific Common Morality. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 29 (1):1-15.
    Some defenders of the view that there is a common morality have conceived such morality as being universal, in the sense of extending across all cultures and times. Those who deny the existence of such a common morality often argue that the universality claim is implausible. Defense of common morality must take account of the distinction between descriptive and normative claims that there is a common morality. This essay considers these claims separately and identifies the nature of the arguments for (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Carson Strong (2007). Gert's Theory of Common Morality. Metaphilosophy 38 (4):535-545.
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Carson Strong (2007). Case Commentary: Parental Request for Life-Prolonging Interventions. HEC Forum 19 (4):377-380.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Carson Strong (2007). Conscientious Objection the Morning After. American Journal of Bioethics 7 (6):32 – 34.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Carson Strong (2007). Embryology, Metaphysics, and Common Sense: A Response to Gómez-Lobo. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 28 (4):337-340.
  17. Carson Strong (2006). Gamete Retrieval After Death or Irreversible Unconsciousness: What Counts as Informed Consent? Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 15 (02):161-171.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Carson Strong (2006). Continuing the Dialogue: A Reply to Bernard Gert. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 16 (2):189-194.
    : Continuing the dialogue begun in the March 2006 issue of the Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, I suggest that Bernard Gert's response to my paper does not adequately address the criticisms I make of his theory's application to bioethics cases.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Carson Strong (2006). Gert's Moral Theory and its Application to Bioethics Cases. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 16 (1):39-58.
    : Bernard Gert's theory of morality has received much critical attention, but there has been relatively little commentary on its practical value for bioethics. An important test of an ethical theory is its ability to yield results that are helpful and plausible when applied to real cases. An examination of Gert's theory and his own attempts to apply it to bioethics cases reveals that there are serious difficulties with regard to its application. These problems are sufficiently severe to support the (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Carson Strong (2006). Preembryo Personhood: An Assessment of the President's Council Arguments. [REVIEW] Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 27 (5):433-453.
    The President’s Council on Bioethics has addressed the moral status of human preembryos in its reports on stem cell research and human therapeutic cloning. Although the Council has been criticized for being hand-picked to favor the right-to-life viewpoint concerning human preembryos, it has embraced the idea that the right-to-life position should be defended in secular terms. This is an important feature of the Council’s work, and it demonstrates a recognition of the need for genuine engagement between opposing sides in the (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Carson Strong (2006). The Limited Utility of Utilitarian Analysis. American Journal of Bioethics 6 (3):67-69.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. Carson Strong (2005). Harming by Conceiving: A Review of Misconceptions and a New Analysis. [REVIEW] Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 30 (5):491 – 516.
    An objection often is raised against the use of reproductive technology to create "nontraditional families," as in ovum donation for postmenopausal women or postmortem artificial insemination. The objection states that conceiving children in such circumstances is harmful to them because of adverse features of these nontraditional families. A similar objection is raised when parents, through negligence or willful disregard of risks, create children with serious genetic diseases or other developmental handicaps. It is claimed that such reproduction harms the children who (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Carson Strong (2005). Lost in Translation: Religious Arguments Made Secular. American Journal of Bioethics 5 (3):29 – 31.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Carson Strong (2005). Obtaining Stem Cells: Moving From Scylla Toward Charybdis. American Journal of Bioethics 5 (6):21 – 23.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Carson Strong (2004). Should We Be Putting a Good Face on Facial Transplantation? American Journal of Bioethics 4 (3):13 – 14.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Carson Strong (2003). Lunch with Lilly: Who Pays? American Journal of Bioethics 3 (3):62-63.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Carson Strong (2003). Reproductive Assistance for HIV-Discordant Couples. American Journal of Bioethics 3 (1):57-60.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Carson Strong (2003). Too Many Twins, Triplets, Quadruplets, and So On: A Call for New Priorities. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 31 (2):272-282.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Carson Strong (2002). Response to ???May a Woman Clone Herself???? By Jean E. Chambers (CQ Vol 10, No 2) and ???Entitlement to Cloning??? By Timothy F. Murphy (CQ Vol 8, No 3). [REVIEW] Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 11 (1):76-82.
    Jean E. Chambers and Timothy F. Murphy responded to my article and extended the debate over human cloning in interesting ways. I had argued that none of the objections to cloning by somatic cell nuclear transfer are successful in the context of infertile couples who use cloning to have genetically related children, assuming the issue of safety is overcome by scientific advances.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Carson Strong (2002). Overview: A Framework for Reproductive Ethics. In Donna L. Dickenson (ed.), Ethical Issues in Maternal-Fetal Medicine. Cambridge University Press. 17--36.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. Carson Strong (2002). Those Divisive Stem Cells: Dealing with Our Most Contentious Issues. American Journal of Bioethics 2 (1):39 – 40.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. Carson Strong (2001). Can't You Control Your Children? American Journal of Bioethics 1 (1):12 – 13.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. Carson Strong (2001). How Should IVF Programs Handle Initial Disclosure of Information to Prospective Ovum Donors? American Journal of Bioethics 1 (4):23 – 25.
    (2001). How Should IVF Programs Handle Initial Disclosure of Information to Prospective Ovum Donors? The American Journal of Bioethics: Vol. 1, No. 4, pp. 23-25.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. Carson Strong (2000). Specified Principlism: What is It, and Does It Really Resolve Cases Better Than Casuistry? Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 25 (3):323 – 341.
    Principlism has been advocated as an approach to resolving concrete cases and issues in bioethics, but critics have pointed out that a main problem for principlism is its lack of a method for assigning priorities to conflicting ethical principles. A version of principlism referred to as 'specified principlism' has been put forward in an attempt to overcome this problem. However, none of the advocates of specified principlism have attempted to demonstrate that the method actually works in resolving detailed clinical cases. (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. Carson Strong (1999). Commentary. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 8 (4):541-542.
    In this case, one should expect that providing hydration sufficient to maintain fluid balance would tend to prolong the dying process. In a well-known case at Johns Hopkins University, fluids (and feedings) were withheld from a newborn with anomalies, and the infant died after 15 days, compared to three weeks in the present case, in which fluids were given. In the famous Baby Doe case, fluids and nutrition were withheld and the infant lived only six days. In the case at (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Carson Strong (1999). Critiques of Casuistry and Why They Are Mistaken. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 20 (5):395-411.
    Casuistic methods of reasoning in medical ethics have been criticized by a number of authors. At least five main objections to casuistry have been put forward: (1) it requires a uniformity of views that is not present in contemporary pluralistic society; (2) it cannot achieve consensus on controversial issues; (3) it is unable to examine critically intuitions about cases; (4) it yields different conclusions about cases when alternative paradigms are chosen; and (5) it cannot articulate the grounds of its conclusions. (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. Carson Strong (1999). Ethical and Legal Aspects of Sperm Retrieval After Death or Persistent Vegetative State. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 27 (4):347-358.
  38. Carson Strong (1998). Cloning and Infertility. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 7 (03):279-293.
    Although there are important moral arguments against cloning human beings, it has been suggested that there might be exceptional cases in which cloning humans would be ethically permissible. One type of supposed exceptional case involves infertile couples who want to have children by cloning. This paper explores whether cloning would be ethically permissible in infertility cases and the separate question of whether we should have a policy allowing cloning in such cases. One caveat should be stated at the beginning, however. (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. Carson Strong & Bonnie Steinbock (1998). Ethics in Reproductive and Perinatal Medicine: A New Frontier. Bioethics-Oxford 12 (3):253-255.
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. Carson Strong (1994). Respecting the Health Care Decision-Making Capacity of Minors. Bioethics Forum 11 (4):7-12.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. Carson Strong (1993). Patients Should Not Always Come First in Treatment Decisions. Journal of Clinical Ethics 4 (1):63.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. Carson Strong (1991). Delivering Hydrocephalic Fetuses. Bioethics 5 (1):1–22.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. Carson Strong (1991). Maternal Rights, Fetal Harms. Hastings Center Report 21 (3):21-23.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. Thomas E. Elkins, Carson Strong, Alan R. Wolfe & Douglas Brown (1986). An Ethics Committee in a Reproductive Health Clinic for Mentally Handicapped Persons. Hastings Center Report 16 (3):20-22.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Carson Strong (1984). Paternalism in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 5 (1).
    Two factors are discussed which have important implications for the issue of paternalism in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU): the physician's role as advocate for the patient; and the range of typical responses of parents who learn that their neonate has a serious illness. These factors are pertinent to the task of identifying those actions which are paternalistic, as well as to the question of whether paternalism is justified. It is argued that certain behavior by physicians which is often (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. Carson Strong (1984). The Neonatologist's Duty to Patient and Parents. Hastings Center Report 14 (4):10-16.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. Carson Strong (1983). Defective Infants and Their Impact on Families: Ethical and Legal Considerations. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 11 (4):168-172.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. Carson Strong (1983). The Tiniest Newborns. Hastings Center Report 13 (1):14-19.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. Carson Strong (1983). Unjustified AID for the Poor? Hastings Center Report 13 (4):50-50.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  50. Carson Strong (1981). Positive Killing and the Irreversibly Unconscious Patient. Bioethics Quarterly 3 (3-4):190-205.
    Various arguments have been given against positive euthanasia, but little attention has been given to the question of whether these arguments are uniformly effective in all contexts. There appears to be a range of cases, involving non-voluntary killing of irreversibly unconscious patients, in which these arguments do not succeed. Various reasons have been given in support of positive killing in such cases. It can be argued that there is a range of cases for which a policy of allowing positive killing (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 51