Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28188420›Full record

ArticleTheoretical medicine and bioethics2017

Clashes of consensus: on the problem of both justifying abortion of fetuses with Down syndrome and rejecting infanticide.

Henrik Friberg-Fernros

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Theoretical medicine and bioethics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Henrik Friberg-FernrosDepartment of Political Science, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden. henrik.friberg-fernros@pol.gu.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3645-8625

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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.

Indexed as

Abortion, InducedBeginning of Human LifeConsensusDown SyndromeFemaleFetal ViabilityFetusHumansInfanticideInfant, NewbornMoral ObligationsPersonhoodPregnancyValue of LifeAbortionCriteria of consciousnessDown syndromeGood Samaritan argumentInfanticideViability

Identifiers

PMID28188420
PMCPMC5443847

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.