17 found
Sort by:
  1. Peter Herissone-Kelly (2012). Habermas, Human Agency, and Human Genetic Enhancement. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 21 (02):200-210.
    Recent developments in genomic science hold out the tantalizing prospect of soon being able to treat and prevent a wide variety of medical conditions through gene therapy. In time, it may be possible to use similar techniques not simply to combat disease but also to enhance, or improve on, normal human functioning.
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Peter Herissone-Kelly (2012). Habermas, Human Agency, and Human Genetic Enhancement--The Grown, the Made, and Responsibility for Actions. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 21 (2):200-210.
    Recent developments in genomic science hold out the tantalizing prospect of soon being able to treat and prevent a wide variety of medical conditions through gene therapy. In time, it may be possible to use similar techniques not simply to combat disease but also to enhance, or improve on, normal human functioning.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Peter Herissone-Kelly (2011). Reasons, Rationalities, and Procreative Beneficence: Need Häyry Stand Politely By While Savulescu and Herissone-Kelly Disagree? Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 20 (2):258-267.
    The claim that the answers we give to many of the central questions in genethics will depend crucially upon the particular rationality we adopt in addressing them is central to Matti Häyry’s thorough and admirably fair-minded book, Rationality and the Genetic Challenge. That claim implies, of course, that there exists a plurality of rationalities, or discrete styles of reasoning, that can be deployed when considering concrete moral problems. This, indeed, is Häyry’s position. Although he believes that there are certain features (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Peter Herissone-Kelly (2011). Wrongs, Preferences, and the Selection of Children: A Critique of Rebecca Bennett's Argument Against the Principle of Procreative Beneficence. Bioethics 26 (8):447-454.
    Rebecca Bennett, in a recent paper dismissing Julian Savulescu's principle of procreative beneficence, advances both a negative and a positive thesis. The negative thesis holds that the principle's theoretical foundation – the notion of impersonal harm or non-person-affecting wrong – is indefensible. Therefore, there can be no obligations of the sort that the principle asserts. The positive thesis, on the other hand, attempts to plug an explanatory gap that arises once the principle has been rejected. That is, it holds that (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Peter Herissone-Kelly (2010). Capacity and Consent in England and Wales: The Mental Capacity Act Under Scrutiny. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 19 (03):344-352.
    The Mental Capacity Act 2005 came into force in England and Wales in 2007. Its primary purpose is to provide “a statutory framework to empower and protect people who may lack capacity to make some decisions for themselves.” Examples of such people are those with dementia, learning disabilities, mental health problems, and so on. The Act also gives those who currently have capacity a legal framework within which they can make arrangements for a time when they may come to lack (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Doris Schroeder & Peter Herissone-Kelly (2010). Bioethics and Stephen Toulmin's Argumentation Theory. In Matti Häyry (ed.), Arguments and Analysis in Bioethics. Rodopi
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Peter Herissone-Kelly (2009). Two Varieties of “Better-For” Judgements. In David Wasserman & Melinda Roberts (eds.), Harming Future Persons. Springer 249--263.
    This paper argues against Julian Savulescu's principle of procreative beneficence. It maintains that prospective parents have no obligation at all to choose the child, out of a range of possible children, who is likely to lead the best life. This is because a standpoint that the author labels "the internal perspective" is a perfectly appropriate one for parents to adopt when thinking about their own future children. It is only policy makers who are obliged to take up an opposing standpoint--"the (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Keith A. Bauer, Courtney S. Campbell, Lauren A. Clark, Paul J. Ford, Sven Ove Hansson, Matti Häyry, Sarah Hayward, Peter Herissone-Kelly & Micah Hester (2007). Bette Anton, MLS, is Head Librarian for the Pamela & Kenneth Fong Optometry & Health Sciences Library of the University of California, Berkeley. This Library Serves the UC Berkeley School of Optometry and the UC Berkeley–UC San Francisco Joint Medical Program. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 16:251-253.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Peter Herissone-Kelly (2007). The Transcendental Ideality of Space and the Neglected Alternative. Kant-Studien 98 (3):269-282.
    In the Transcendental Aesthetic, Kant famously makes the following startling claim, which we can call the transcendental ideality thesis concerning the nature of space, or, for ease of reference in what follows, simply “TI”.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Peter Herissone-Kelly (2007). Parental Love and the Ethics of Sex Selection. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 16 (03):326-335.
    In 2003, the United Kingdom's Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority published a report entitled Sex Selection: Options for Regulation. The report outlined the findings of a 2-year review of available sex selection techniques and recommended that the United Kingdom ought not to permit any regulated technique to be used other than for medical reasons . In so doing, it reflected the widespread opinion—repeatedly expressed in the public consultations that formed the cornerstone of the HFEA's review—that there is something ethically unacceptable, (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Peter Herissone-Kelly (2007). The “Parental Love” Objection to Nonmedical Sex Selection: Deepening the Argument. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 16 (04):446-.
    In my paper “Parental Love and the Ethics of Sex Selection,” published in the previous issue of the Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, I set out to determine whether a plausible argument could be constructed in support of a common intuition about the ethics of sex selection. The intuition in question is that sex selection for nonmedical reasons is incompatible with a proper parental love: that is, with the sort of love that a parent ought to have for her child (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Peter Herissone-Kelly (2006). The Prohibition of Sex Selection for Social Reasons in the United Kingdom: Public Opinion Trumps Reproductive Liberty? Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 15 (03):261-272.
    From 2002 to 2003, the United Kingdom's Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority carried out a review of the available methods of sex selection, the central aims of which were, in the words of the subsequent report.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Matti Häyry, Tuija Takala & Peter Herissone-Kelly (2005). Bioethics and Social Reality. Rodopi.
    This book explores the many connections that bioethical thinking has with social reality. Bioethics, if it is to be effective, must engage with and address the actualities of modern life: policies, regulations, markets, opinions, and technological advances. In these original contributions fifteen notable scholars working in the North West of England take on this challenge.Values in Bioethics makes available original philosophical books in all areas of bioethics, including medical and nursing ethics, health care ethics, research ethics, environmental ethics, and global (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Peter Herissone-Kelly (2005). The Cloning Debate in the United Kingdom: The Academy Meets the Public. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 14 (03):268-276.
    Readers of the Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics need hardly be told that each year a huge amount of very valuable work in bioethics is carried out in the academic's study and the university seminar room and appears in the pages of specialist, restricted-readership journals. However, if it is to be as effective, relevant, and influential as it deserves to be, there arguably comes a point when this work needs to leave the confines of the academy and engage the wider (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Peter Herissone-Kelly (2004). U.K. Bioethics, U.K. Metabioethics: Organ Sales and the Justification of Bioethical Methods. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 13 (03):226-235.
    Bioethicists currently working in the United Kingdom demonstrate—as indeed do the very best of their colleagues internationally—an eagerness to engage in two extremely different but complementary approaches to their subject. First, they readily become involved in discussions of concrete bioethical issues that are of great concern to the medical profession, legislators, and the wider U.K. public. Second, perhaps because they recognize the importance of the “first-order” questions that exercise the public imagination, they show themselves commendably willing to turn their critical (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Peter Herissone-Kelly (2003). Bioethics in the United Kingdom: Genetic Screening, Disability Rights, and the Erosion of Trust. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 12 (03):235-241.
    It goes almost without saying that there are no academic bioethical debates that are unique to the United Kingdom. The debates in which U.K. bioethicists become involved take place in international journals and in books with a worldwide readership. The contributions of those from these shores are frequently made in response to work by academics from the United States, Australia, Scandinavia, and a whole host of other countries.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Peter Herissone-Kelly (2001). Gottlob Frege. The Philosophers' Magazine 14 (14):52-52.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation