Defending two dilemmas
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21514031 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Teresa Baron (0000-0001-9930-209X, Czech Academy of Sciences, corresponding author), Geoffrey Dierckxsens (0000-0003-1844-581X, Czech Academy of Sciences) |
| Year | 2022 |
| Volume | 48 |
| Issue | 9 |
| Pages | 639-640 |
| Publication date | 2022-09-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Journal of Medical Ethics (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0306-6800 • E-ISSN: 1473-4257 |
| Publisher | BMJ (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1136/medethics-2021-107856 |
| PMID | 34610977 |
| OpenAlex | W3204344760 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 7 |
Ashley’s response to our recent paper argues that a fuller appreciation of the available clinical data, of the rights of children to autonomy, and of the primary purpose of gender-affirming endocrine treatment supports the rejection of both the pathway and consent dilemmas for the treatment of gender dysphoria, as raised in this journal. In this response, we highlight certain misrepresentations of our argument, and defend our conclusions against Ashley’s main objections
Alternative medicine · Autonomy · Clinical Ethics · Engineering ethics · Gender dysphoria · Gender identity · Informed consent · Personal autonomy · Political science · Ethics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare · Ethics in medical practice · Law · LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy · Medicine · Psychology · Social Psychology
| Highly cited | No |
|---|