Future People, Involuntary Medical Treatment in Pregnancy and the Duty of Easy Rescue

Bibliographic Data

ID12227668
AuthorsJulian Savulescu (0000-0003-1691-6403, Wellcome Centre for Ethics and Humanities, corresponding author)
Year2007
Volume19
Issue1
Pages1-20
Publication date2007-03-01
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueUtilitas (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0953-8208 • E-ISSN: 1741-6183
PublisherCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1017/s0953820806002317
OpenAlexW2135452267
LanguageEN
Citations received8
References cited30

I argue that pregnant women have a duty to refrain from behaviours (e.g. taking illicit drugs) or to allow certain acts to be done to them (e.g. caesarean section) for the sake of their foetus if the foetus has a reasonable chance of living and being in a harmed state if the woman does not refrain from those behaviours or allow those things to be done to her. There is a proviso: that her refraining from acting or allowing acts to be performed upon her does not significantly harm her. This duty does not presuppose that the foetus is a person. It is grounded on principles of respect for the interests of sentient beings and prevention of harm to future individuals. I give an argument for a general duty of easy rescue

Argument (complex analysis · Caesarean section · Duty · Harm · Harm principle · Law and economics · Political science · Pregnancy · Sociology · State (computer science · Computer Science · Grief, Bereavement, and Mental Health · Homicide, Infanticide, and Child Abuse · Law · Medicine · Psychology · Reproductive Health and Technologies · Social Psychology

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub