| Title |
Clashes of consensus: on the problem of both justifying abortion of fetuses with Down syndrome and rejecting infanticide
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, February 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11017-017-9398-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Henrik Friberg-Fernros |
| Abstract |
Although the abortion of fetuses with Down syndrome has become commonplace, infanticide is still widely rejected. Generally, there are three ways of justifying the differentiation between abortion and infanticide: by referring to the differences between the moral status of the fetus versus the infant, by referring to the differences of the moral status of the act of abortion versus the act of infanticide, or by separating the way the permissibility of abortion is justified from the way the impermissibility of infanticide is justified. My argument is that none of these ways justifies the abortion of fetuses diagnosed with Down syndrome while simultaneously rejecting infanticide. Either the justification for abortion is consistent with infanticide, or it is implausible to justify abortion while rejecting infanticide. I conclude the article by making some preliminary remarks about how one might manage the situation posed by my argument. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 1 | 25% |
| Ireland | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 22 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 18% |
| Researcher | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 9% |
| Professor | 2 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 9% |
| Other | 2 | 9% |
| Unknown | 7 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 18% |
| Philosophy | 2 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 9% |
| Psychology | 2 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 23% |
| Unknown | 6 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 June 2017.
All research outputs
#13,988,486
of 24,505,736 outputs
Outputs from Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics
#151
of 317 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#208,901
of 431,171 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics
#3
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,505,736 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 317 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 431,171 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.