No Country Is An Island

Reproductive Biomedicine Online 11 (1):10-11 (2005)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In its recent report Human Reproductive Technologies and the Law, the House of Commons’ Select Committee on Science and Technology insisted that the United Kingdom ‘does not take a purely insular view’ on sex selection but to carefully consider the impact on other countries before allowing changes to current legislation. True, no country is an island, not even the British Isles. Still, outlawing a harmless practice in Great Britain because of its alleged harmful effects in other countries is bad public policy.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Sex Selection in the United Kingdom.John McMillan - 2002 - Hastings Center Report 32 (1):28-31.
The Presumption in Favour of Liberty.Edgar Dahl - 2004 - Reproductive Biomedicine Online 8 (3):266-267.
Sex Selection In Indonesia: An Ethical and Legal Perspective.Rani Tiyas Budiyanti, Adi Sulistiyono & Pujiyono - 2017 - Eubios Journal of Asian and International Bioethics 27 (1):19-21.

Analytics

Added to PP
2016-04-10

Downloads
276 (#104,847)

6 months
61 (#99,757)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Edgar Dahl
Universität Giessen

References found in this work

Procreative Liberty: The Case for Preconception Sex Selection.Edgar Dahl - 2003 - Reproductive Biomedicine Online 7 (4):380-384.
The Presumption in Favour of Liberty.Edgar Dahl - 2004 - Reproductive Biomedicine Online 8 (3):266-267.

Add more references