The "parental love" objection to nonmedical sex selection: Deepening the argument

Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics

Volumn 16, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 446-455

  Herissone Kelly, Peter ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONFLICT; ETHICS; FEMALE; GENETIC ENGINEERING; HUMAN; LOGIC; LOVE; MALE; MEDICAL ETHICS; PARENT;

DISSENT AND DISPUTES; ETHICS, CLINICAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; LOGIC; LOVE; MALE; PARENTS; SEX PRESELECTION;

EID: 34547938882     PISSN: 09631801     EISSN: 14692147     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0963180107070570     Document Type: Article

References (9)

1. Herissone-Kelly P. Parental love and the ethics of sex selection. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 2007;16:326-35.
2. I will have cause later on to refine this claim.
3. Weil S. An Anthology. London: Penguin; 2005:293.
4. See note 1, Herissone-Kelly 2007.
5. PAO is introduced in Herissone-Kelly P. Procreative beneficence and the prospective parent. Journal of Medical Ethics 2006;32:166-9.
6. Baldwin T. Understanding the Opposition. Prenatal Diagnosis 2006;26:637-45.
7. I am grateful to Neil Manson for making this point.
8. I am indebted to Rachel Cooper and Alison Stone for this objection.
9. By this, I mean that the question is why a parent's love ought to conform to the any incumbent model and so to parental love as I have analyzed it. Clearly, there is a trivial sense in which a parent's love ought to be parental love, given that parental love has been explicitly defined as the sort of love that a parent ought to have for her child. That, however, is not the sense intended here.