Southwest Philosophy Review 30 (1):187-194 (2014)

Authors
James Rocha
Louisiana State University
Abstract
Among the various proposed ultrasound laws, a few have provisions that either provide the option for the pregnant woman to hear the heartbeat or require that the heartbeat be played and merely give the woman the option to somehow avert her ears. I will argue that these heartbeat provisions actually belie the argument that these laws are intended to assist autonomous choosing. Since the information could be provided just as easily through a factual statement , it cannot be justified to involve emotions in a way that the pregnant woman did not autonomously choose for herself.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.5840/swphilreview201430118
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 59,916
External links

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.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP index
2015-01-22

Total views
16 ( #629,592 of 2,433,203 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #463,180 of 2,433,203 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes