In defense of selection for nondisease genes

American Journal of Bioethics

Volumn 1, Issue 1, 2001, Pages 16-19

  Savulescu, Julian ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANALYTICAL APPROACH; ARTICLE; CHILD; CHILD WELFARE; ETHICS; FEMALE; FREEDOM; GENETIC ENGINEERING; GENETICS AND REPRODUCTION; HUMAN; MALE; MEDICAL GENETICS; POLICY; QUALITY OF LIFE; SOCIAL CONTROL; SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY; UTILIZATION REVIEW;

ANALYTICAL APPROACH; GENETICS AND REPRODUCTION;

CHILD; CHILD WELFARE; ETHICAL ANALYSIS; ETHICS; EUGENICS; FEMALE; FREEDOM; GENETIC ENGINEERING; HUMANS; MALE; PREJUDICE; PUBLIC POLICY; QUALITY OF LIFE; SEX PRESELECTION; SOCIAL CONTROL, FORMAL;

EID: 0035752024     PISSN: 15265161     EISSN: 15360075     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1162/152651601750078907     Document Type: Note

References (7)

1. Batzofin, J. H. 1987. XY sperm separation for sex selection. Urological Clinics of North America 14:609-618.
2. Gillam, L. 1999. Prenatal diagnosis and discrimination against the disabled. Journal of Medical Ethics 25:163-171.
3. Halliday, J. n.d. Victorian Perinatal Data Collection Unit.
4. Lui, P., and G. A. Rose. 1995. Social aspects of over 800 couples coming forward for gender selection of their children. Human Reproduction 10:968-71.
5. Parfit, D. 1984. Rights, interests, and possible people. Pt. 4 of Reasons and persons. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
6. Savulescu, J. 1999. Sex selection: The case for. Medical Journal of Australia 171:373-375.
7. Savulescu, J., and E. Dahl. 2000. Sex selection and preimplantation genetic diagnosis: A response to the ethics committee of the american society of eeproductive medicine. Human Reproduction 15:1879-1880. [Also available at www.oup.co.uk/humrep/commentandwww.humrep.oupjournals.org.]