Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: lorne who wrote (132902)	5/17/2012 12:07:40 PM
From: FJB	3 Recommendations Respond to of 224704

After-birth abortion: why should the baby live? Alberto Giubilini 1, 2, Francesca Minerva 3 +Author Affiliations 1Department of Philosophy, University of Milan, Milan, Italy2Centre for Human Bioethics, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia3Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, AustraliaCorrespondence toDr Francesca Minerva, CAPPE, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia; francesca.minerva@unimelb.edu.auContributors AG and FM contributed equally to the manuscript. Received 25 November 2011Revised 26 January 2012Accepted 27 January 2012Published Online First 23 February 2012 http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2012/03/01/medethics-2011-100411.full AbstractAbortion is largely accepted even for reasons that do not have anything to do with the fetus' health. By showing that (1) both fetuses and newborns do not have the same moral status as actual persons, (2) the fact that both are potential persons is morally irrelevant and (3) adoption is not always in the best interest of actual people, the authors argue that what we call ‘after-birth abortion’ (killing a newborn) should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled.