190 found
Sort by:
Disambiguations:
Julian Savulescu [137]J. Savulescu [52]J. Savulescu [1]
  1. L. De Crespigny & Savulescu, J., Pregnant Women with Fetal Abnormalities: The Forgotten People in the Abortion Debate.
    of (from Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics) Medical Journal of Australia, 188 (2) 100 - 102.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Naylor, E., Wood, D. & J. Savulescu, Neuroscience, Neuroethics and the Law, Student British Medical Journal, February 2008.
    of (from Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics).
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Julian Savulescu, Solving the Stem Cell and Cloning Puzzle.
    , from Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics Julian Savulescu’s comment on the ethics of using embryos for medical research. To be published in The Age.
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Brian D. Earp, Anders Sandberg & Julian Savulescu (forthcoming). The Medicalization of Love. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics:1-19.
    Pharmaceuticals or other emerging technologies could be used to enhance (or diminish) feelings of lust, attraction, and attachment in adult romantic partnerships. While such interventions could conceivably be used to promote individual (and couple) well-being, their widespread development and/or adoption might lead to “medicalization” of human love and heartache—for some, a source of serious concern. In this essay, we argue that the “medicalization of love” need not necessarily be problematic, on balance, but could plausibly be expected to have either good (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Les Halpin, Julian Savulescu, Kevin Talbot, Martin Turner & Paul Talman (forthcoming). Improving Access to Medicines: Empowering Patients in the Quest to Improve Treatment for Rare Lethal Diseases. Journal of Medical Ethics:2013-101427.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Hannah Maslen, Tom Douglas, Roi Cohen Kadosh, Neil Levy & Julian Savulescu (forthcoming). Do-It-Yourself Brain Stimulation: A Regulatory Model. Journal of Medical Ethics:2013-101692.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. I. Persson & J. Savulescu (forthcoming). Reply to Commentators on Unfit for the Future. Journal of Medical Ethics.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Ingmar Persson & Julian Savulescu (forthcoming). Summary of Unfit for the Future. Journal of Medical Ethics.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Julian Savulescu (forthcoming). The Case for Creating Human-Nonhuman Cell Lines. Bioethics Forum.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. John Harris & Julian Savulescu (2015). A Debate About Moral Enhancement. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 24 (1):8-22.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Guy Kahane, Jim A. C. Everett, Brian D. Earp, Miguel Farias & Julian Savulescu (2015). 'Utilitarian' Judgments in Sacrificial Moral Dilemmas Do Not Reflect Impartial Concern for the Greater Good. Cognition 134:193-209.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Guy Kahane & Julian Savulescu (2015). Normal Human Variation: Refocussing the Enhancement Debate. Bioethics 29 (2):133-143.
    This article draws attention to several common mistakes in thinking about biomedical enhancement, mistakes that are made even by some supporters of enhancement. We illustrate these mistakes by examining objections that John Harris has recently raised against the use of pharmacological interventions to directly modulate moral decision-making. We then apply these lessons to other influential figures in the debate about enhancement. One upshot of our argument is that many considerations presented as powerful objections to enhancement are really strong considerations in (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Ingmar Persson & Julian Savulescu (2015). The Art of Misunderstanding Moral Bioenhancement. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 24 (1):48-57.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Dominic Wilkinson, G. Owen Schaefer, Kelton Tremellen & Julian Savulescu (2015). Double Trouble: Should Double Embryo Transfer Be Banned? Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 36 (2):121-139.
    What role should legislation or policy play in avoiding the complications of in-vitro fertilization? In this article, we focus on single versus double embryo transfer, and assess three arguments in favour of mandatory single embryo transfer: risks to the mother, risks to resultant children, and costs to society. We highlight significant ethical concerns about each of these. Reproductive autonomy and non-paternalism are strong enough to outweigh the health concerns for the woman. Complications due to non-identity cast doubt on the extent (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Dominic Wilkinson, Robert Truog & Julian Savulescu (2015). In Favour of Medical Dissensus: Why We Should Agree to Disagree About End‐of‐Life Decisions. Bioethics 29 (4).
    End-of-life decision-making is controversial. There are different views about when it is appropriate to limit life-sustaining treatment, and about what palliative options are permissible. One approach to decisions of this nature sees consensus as crucial. Decisions to limit treatment are made only if all or a majority of caregivers agree. We argue, however, that it is a mistake to require professional consensus in end-of-life decisions. In the first part of the article we explore practical, ethical, and legal factors that support (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Lucius Caviola, Adriano Mannino, Julian Savulescu & Nadira Faber, Cognitive Biases Can Affect Moral Intuitions About Cognitive Enhancement.
    Research into cognitive biases that impair human judgment has mostly been applied to the area of economic decision-making. Ethical decision-making has been comparatively neglected. Since ethical decisions often involve very high individual as well as collective stakes, analyzing how cognitive biases affect them can be expected to yield important results. In this theoretical article, we consider the ethical debate about cognitive enhancement and suggest a number of cognitive biases that are likely to affect moral intuitions and judgments about CE: status (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. L. de Crespigny & J. Savulescu (2014). Homebirth and the Future Child. Journal of Medical Ethics 40 (12):807-812.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Brian D. Earp, Anders Sandberg, Guy Kahane & Julian Savulescu, When is Diminishment a Form of Enhancement? : Rethinking the Enhancement Debate in Biomedical Ethics.
    The enhancement debate in neuroscience and biomedical ethics tends to focus on the augmentation of certain capacities or functions: memory, learning, attention, and the like. Typically, the point of contention is whether these augmentative enhancements should be considered permissible for individuals with no particular “medical” disadvantage along any of the dimensions of interest. Less frequently addressed in the literature, however, is the fact that sometimes the diminishment of a capacity or function, under the right set of circumstances, could plausibly contribute (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Jacob Gipson, Guy Kahane & Julian Savulescu (2014). Attitudes of Lay People to Withdrawal of Treatment in Brain Damaged Patients. Neuroethics 7 (1):1-9.
    BackgroundWhether patients in the vegetative state (VS), minimally conscious state (MCS) or the clinically related locked-in syndrome (LIS) should be kept alive is a matter of intense controversy. This study aimed to examine the moral attitudes of lay people to these questions, and the values and other factors that underlie these attitudes.MethodOne hundred ninety-nine US residents completed a survey using the online platform Mechanical Turk, comprising demographic questions, agreement with treatment withdrawal from each of the conditions, agreement with a series (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Will Jefferson, Thomas Douglas, Guy Kahane & Julian Savulescu (2014). Enhancement and Civic Virtue. Social Theory and Practice 40 (3):499-527.
    Opponents of biomedical enhancement frequently adopt what Allen Buchanan has called the “Personal Goods Assumption.” On this assumption, the benefits of biomedical enhancement will accrue primarily to those individuals who undergo enhancements, not to wider society. Buchanan has argued that biomedical enhancements might in fact have substantial social benefits by increasing productivity. We outline another way in which enhancements might benefit wider society: by augmenting civic virtue and thus improving the functioning of our political communities. We thus directly confront critics (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Neil Levy, Thomas Douglas, Guy Kahane, Sylvia Terbeck, Philip J. Cowen, Miles Hewstone & Julian Savulescu (2014). Are You Morally Modified?: The Moral Effects of Widely Used Pharmaceuticals. Philosophy, Psychiatry, and Psychology 21 (2):111-125.
  22. Neil Levy, Thomas Douglas, Guy Kahane, Sylvia Terbeck, Philip J. Cowen, Miles Hewstone & Julian Savulescu (2014). Disease, Normality, and Current Pharmacological Moral Modification. Philosophy, Psychiatry, and Psychology 21 (2):135-137.
  23. Hannah Maslen, Thomas Douglas, Roi Cohen Kadosh, Neil Levy & Julian Savulescu, The Regulation of Cognitive Enhancement Devices : Extending the Medical Model.
    This article presents a model for regulating cognitive enhancement devices . Recently, it has become very easy for individuals to purchase devices which directly modulate brain function. For example, transcranial direct current stimulators are increasingly being produced and marketed online as devices for cognitive enhancement. Despite posing risks in a similar way to medical devices, devices that do not make any therapeutic claims do not have to meet anything more than basic product safety standards. We present the case for extending (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Hannah Maslen, Nadira Faulmüller & Julian Savulescu, Pharmacological Cognitive Enhancement : How Neuroscientific Research Could Advance Ethical Debate.
    There are numerous ways people can improve their cognitive capacities: good nutrition and regular exercise can produce long-term improvements across many cognitive domains, whilst commonplace stimulants such as coffee temporarily boost levels of alertness and concentration. Effects like these have been well-documented in the medical literature and they raise few ethical issues. More recently, however, clinical research has shown that the off-label use of some pharmaceuticals can, under certain conditions, have modest cognition-improving effects. Substances such as methylphenidate and modafinil can (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. I. Persson & J. Savulescu (2014). Should Moral Bioenhancement Be Compulsory? Reply to Vojin Rakic. Journal of Medical Ethics 40 (4):251-252.
    In his challenging paper,1 Vojin Rakic argues against our claim that ‘there are strong reasons to believe’ that moral bioenhancement should be obligatory or compulsory if it can be made safe and effective.2 Rakic starts by criticising an argument that we employed against John Harris.3 ,4 In this argument we maintain, among other things, that moral bioenhancement cannot be wholly effective if our will is free in what is called an ‘indeterministic’ or ‘contra-causal sense’; that is, if our choices are (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Ingmar Persson & Julian Savulescu (2014). Against Fetishism About Egalitarianism and in Defense of Cautious Moral Bioenhancement. American Journal of Bioethics 14 (4):39-42.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. J. Savulescu (2014). A Simple Solution to the Puzzles of End of Life? Voluntary Palliated Starvation. Journal of Medical Ethics 40 (2):110-113.
    Should people be assisted to die or be given euthanasia when they are suffering from terminal medical conditions? Should they be assisted to die when they are suffering but do not have a ‘diagnosable medical illness?’ What about assisted dying for psychiatric conditions? And is there a difference morally between assisted suicide, voluntary active euthanasia and voluntary passive euthanasia?These are deep questions directly addressed or in the background of the productive discussion between Varelius and Young.1 ,2 Their focus is whether (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. J. Savulescu (2014). Challenging Accepted Ethical Beliefs. Journal of Medical Ethics 40 (2):71-72.
    This month's issue presents arguments on three longstanding ethical issues: prostitution, euthanasia and organ donation. It also addresses three issues perhaps more directly linked to daily practice across clinical care and research: resource allocation, consent, and, in an interesting pair of papers, how a clinician's own experiences might affect their ethical judgement and therefore clinical care.In a provocative article, Ole Martin Moen argues that our increasing acceptance of casual sex, that is, sexual encounters which do not involve an emotional connection, (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Julian Savulescu & Earp (2014). Neuroreductionism About Sex and Love. Think 13 (38):7-12.
    is the tendency to reduce complex mental phenomena to brain states, confusing correlation for physical causation. In this paper, we illustrate the dangers of this popular neuro-fallacy, by looking at an example drawn from the media: a story about in women. We discuss the role of folk dualism in perpetuating such a confusion, and draw some conclusions about the role of in our understanding of romantic love.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. G. Owen Schaefer, Guy Kahane & Julian Savulescu (2014). Autonomy and Enhancement. Neuroethics 7 (2):123-136.
    Some have objected to human enhancement on the grounds that it violates the autonomy of the enhanced. These objections, however, overlook the interesting possibility that autonomy itself could be enhanced. How, exactly, to enhance autonomy is a difficult problem due to the numerous and diverse accounts of autonomy in the literature. Existing accounts of autonomy enhancement rely on narrow and controversial conceptions of autonomy. However, we identify one feature of autonomy common to many mainstream accounts: reasoning ability. Autonomy can then (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. G. Owen Schaefer & Julian Savulescu (2014). The Ethics of Producing In Vitro Meat. Journal of Applied Philosophy 31 (1):188-202.
    The prospect of consumable meat produced in a laboratory setting without the need to raise and slaughter animals is both realistic and exciting. Not only could such in vitro meat become popular due to potential cost savings, but it also avoids many of the ethical and environmental problems with traditional meat productions. However, as with any new technology, in vitro meat is likely to face some detractors. We examine in detail three potential objections: 1) in vitro meat is disrespectful, either (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. Dominic Wilkinson & Julian Savulescu (2014). A Costly Separation Between Withdrawing and Withholding Treatment in Intensive Care. Bioethics 28 (3):127-137.
    Ethical analyses, professional guidelines and legal decisions support the equivalence thesis for life-sustaining treatment: if it is ethical to withhold treatment, it would be ethical to withdraw the same treatment. In this paper we explore reasons why the majority of medical professionals disagree with the conclusions of ethical analysis. Resource allocation is considered by clinicians to be a legitimate reason to withhold but not to withdraw intensive care treatment. We analyse five arguments in favour of non-equivalence, and find only relatively (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. Dominic Wilkinson & Julian Savulescu, Disability, Discrimination and Death : Is It Justified to Ration Life Saving Treatment for Disabled Newborn Infants?
    Disability might be relevant to decisions about life support in intensive care in several ways. It might affect the chance of treatment being successful, or a patient’s life expectancy with treatment. It may affect whether treatment is in a patient’s best interests. However, even if treatment would be of overall benefit it may be unaffordable and consequently unable to be provided. In this paper we will draw on the example of neonatal intensive care, and ask whether or when it is (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. Ben Bambery, Michael Selgelid, Hannah Maslen, Andrew J. Pollard & Julian Savulescu (2013). The Case for Mandatory Flu Vaccination of Children. American Journal of Bioethics 13 (9):38 - 40.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. Alastair V. Campbell, Raanan Gillon, Julian Savulescu, John Harris, Soren Holm, H. Martyn Evans, David Greaves, Jane Macnaughton, Deborah Kirklin & Sue Eckstein (2013). The Journal of Medical Ethics and Medical Humanities: Offsprings of the London Medical Group. Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (11):667-668.
    Ted Shotter's founding of the London Medical Group 50 years ago in 1963 had several far reaching implications for medical ethics, as other papers in this issue indicate. Most significant for the joint authors of this short paper was his founding of the quarterly Journal of Medical Ethics in 1975, with Alastair Campbell as its first editor-in-chief. In 1980 Raanan Gillon began his 20-year editorship . Gillon was succeeded in 2001 by Julian Savulescu, followed by John Harris and Soren Holm (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Thomas Douglas, Russell Powell & Julian Savulescu (2013). Is the Creation of Artificial Life Morally Significant? Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 44 (4):688-696.
    In 2010, the Venter lab announced that it had created the first bacterium with an entirely synthetic genome. This was reported to be the first instance of ‘artificial life,’ and in the ethical and policy discussions that followed it was widely assumed that the creation of artificial life is in itself morally significant. We cast doubt on this assumption. First we offer an account of the creation of artificial life that distinguishes this from the derivation of organisms from existing life (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. Brian D. Earp, Olga A. Wudarczyk, Anders Sandberg & Julian Savulescu (2013). If I Could Just Stop Loving You: Anti-Love Biotechnology and the Ethics of a Chemical Breakup. American Journal of Bioethics 13 (11):3-17.
    ?Love hurts??as the saying goes?and a certain amount of pain and difficulty in intimate relationships is unavoidable. Sometimes it may even be beneficial, since adversity can lead to personal growth, self-discovery, and a range of other components of a life well-lived. But other times, love can be downright dangerous. It may bind a spouse to her domestic abuser, draw an unscrupulous adult toward sexual involvement with a child, put someone under the insidious spell of a cult leader, and even inspire (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. Ingmar Persson & Julian Savulescu (2013). Getting Moral Enhancement Right: The Desirability of Moral Bioenhancement. Bioethics 27 (3):124-131.
    We respond to a number of objections raised by John Harris in this journal to our argument that we should pursue genetic and other biological means of morally enhancing human beings (moral bioenhancement). We claim that human beings now have at their disposal means of wiping out life on Earth and that traditional methods of moral education are probably insufficient to achieve the moral enhancement required to ensure that this will not happen. Hence, we argue, moral bioenhancement should be sought (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. Jonathan Pugh, Guy Kahane & Julian Savulescu (2013). Cohen's Conservatism and Human Enhancement. Journal of Ethics 17 (4):331-354.
    In an intriguing essay, G. A. Cohen has defended a conservative bias in favour of existing value. In this paper, we consider whether Cohen’s conservatism raises a new challenge to the use of human enhancement technologies. We develop some of Cohen’s suggestive remarks into a new line of argument against human enhancement that, we believe, is in several ways superior to existing objections. However, we shall argue that on closer inspection, Cohen’s conservatism fails to offer grounds for a strong sweeping (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. J. Savulescu (2013). Elective Ventilation and Interests. Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (3):129-129.
    This paper examines questions concerning elective ventilation, contextualised within English law and policy. It presents the general debate with reference both to the Exeter Protocol on elective ventilation, and the considerable developments in legal principle since the time that that protocol was declared to be unlawful. I distinguish different aspects of what might be labelled elective ventilation policies under the following four headings: ‘basic elective ventilation’; ‘epistemically complex elective ventilation’; ‘practically complex elective ventilation’; and ‘epistemically and practically complex elective ventilation’. (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. J. Savulescu (2013). Just Dying: The Futility of Futility. Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (9):583-584.
    I argue that Brierley et al are wrong to claim that parents who request futile treatment are acting against the interests of their child. A better ethical ground for withholding or withdrawing life-prolonging treatment is not that it is in the interests of the patient to die, but rather on grounds of the limitation of resources and the requirements of distributive justice. Put simply, not all treatment that might be in a person's interests must ethically be provided.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. Julian Savulescu (2013). Abortion, Infanticide and Allowing Babies to Die, 40 Years On. Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (5):257-259.
    In January 2012, the Journal of Medical Ethics published online Giubilini and Minerva's paper, ‘After-birth abortion. Why should the baby live?’.1 The Journal publishes articles based on the quality of their argument, their contribution to the existing literature, and relevance to current medicine. This article met those criteria. It created unprecedented global outrage for a paper published in an academic medical ethics journal. In this special issue of the Journal, Giubilini and Minerva's paper comes to print along with 31 articles (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. Julian Savulescu (2013). A Liberal Consequentialist Approach to Regulation of Cognitive Enhancers. American Journal of Bioethics 13 (7):53-55.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. Julian Savulescu (2013). Male Circumcision and the Enhancement Debate: Harm Reduction, Not Prohibition. Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (7):416-417.
    Around a third of men worldwide are circumcised. It is probably the most commonly performed surgical procedure. Circumcision is also one of the oldest forms of attempted human enhancement. It is and has been done for religious, social, aesthetic and health reasons.Circumcision has a variety of benefits and risks, many of which are discussed in this issue. There is some dispute about the magnitude and likelihood of these benefits and risks. Some argue that the risks outweigh the benefits and circumcision (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Julian Savulescu (2013). Rational Evolution. The Philosophers' Magazine 62 (62):67-73.
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. Julian Savulescu & Robert Sparrow (2013). Making Better Babies: Pro and Con-Presented by the Monash University Centre for Human Bioethics, Tuesday 2 October, 6.00-7.30 Pm. [REVIEW] Monash Bioethics Review 31 (1):36-59.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. Sylvia Terbeck, Guy Kahane, Sarah McTavish, Julian Savulescu, Neil Levy, Miles Hewstone & Philip Cowen (2013). Beta Adrenergic Blockade Reduces Utilitarian Judgement. Biological Psychology 92 (2):323-328.
    Noradrenergic pathways are involved in mediating the central and peripheral effects of physiological arousal. The aim of the present study was to investigate the role of noradrenergic transmission in moral decision-making. We studied the effects in healthy volunteers of propranolol (a noradrenergic beta-adrenoceptor antagonist) on moral judgement in a set of moral dilemmas pitting utilitarian outcomes (e.g., saving five lives) against highly aversive harmful actions (e.g., killing an innocent person) in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group design. Propranolol (40 mg orally) (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. Katja Wiech, Guy Kahane, Nicholas Shackel, Miguel Farias, Julian Savulescu & Irene Tracey (2013). Cold or Calculating? Reduced Activity in the Subgenual Cingulate Cortex Reflects Decreased Emotional Aversion to Harming in Counterintuitive Utilitarian Judgment. Cognition 126 (3):364-372.
    Recent research on moral decision-making has suggested that many common moral judgments are based on immediate intuitions. However, some individuals arrive at highly counterintuitive utilitarian conclusions about when it is permissible to harm other individuals. Such utilitarian judgments have been attributed to effortful reasoning that has overcome our natural emotional aversion to harming others. Recent studies, however, suggest that such utilitarian judgments might also result from a decreased aversion to harming others, due to a deficit in empathic concern and social (...)
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. D. Wilkinson & J. Savulescu (2013). Is It Better to Be Minimally Conscious Than Vegetative? Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (9):557-558.
    In the case of Re M, summarised in the paper by Julian Sheather, Justice Baker faced the difficult task of weighing up objectively whether or not it was in Mâs best interests to withdraw artificial feeding and to let her die.1 The judge concluded that M was ârecognisably aliveâ, and that the advantages of continued life outweighed the disadvantages. He compared her minimally conscious state favourably to that of a persistent vegetative state .2 It was clear that artificial feeding would (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  50. Brian D. Earp, Anders Sandberg & Julian Savulescu (2012). Natural Selection, Childrearing, and the Ethics of Marriage (and Divorce): Building a Case for the Neuroenhancement of Human Relationships. [REVIEW] Philosophy and Technology 25 (4):561-587.
    We argue that the fragility of contemporary marriages—and the corresponding high rates of divorce—can be explained (in large part) by a three-part mismatch: between our relationship values, our evolved psychobiological natures, and our modern social, physical, and technological environment. “Love drugs” could help address this mismatch by boosting our psychobiologies while keeping our values and our environment intact. While individual couples should be free to use pharmacological interventions to sustain and improve their romantic connection, we suggest that they may have (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 190