Search Results Search Sort by RelevanceMost Recent Case and Commentary Mar 2022 Alignment of Abolition Medicine With Reproductive Justice Crystal M. Hayes, PhD, MSW and Anu Manchikanti Gomez, PhD Abolition medicine and reproductive justice are synergistic approaches that advance a radical vision of a racially just world. AMA J Ethics. 2022;24(3):E188-193. doi: 10.1001/amajethics.2022.188. State of the Art and Science Apr 2016 Keeping the Backdoor to Eugenics Ajar?: Disability and the Future of Prenatal Screening Gareth M. Thomas, PhD and Barbara Katz Rothman, PhD Noninvasive prenatal testing arguably constitutes a form of eugenics in a social context in which certain reproductive outcomes are not valued. AMA J Ethics. 2016;18(4):406-415. doi: 10.1001/journalofethics.2016.18.4.stas1-1604. Viewpoint Sep 2022 Why the Post-Roe Era Requires Protecting Conscientious Provision as We Protect Conscientious Refusal in Health Care Isa Ryan, MD, MSc, Ashish Premkumar, MD, and Katie Watson, JD Extraordinary changes to the legal landscape of abortion care require reevaluating health professionals’ appropriation of conscience. AMA J Ethics. 2022;24(9):E906-912. doi: 10.1001/amajethics.2022.906. Podcast Sep 2022 Author Interview: “Why the Post-Roe Era Requires Protecting Conscientious Provision as We Protect Conscientious Refusal in Health Care” Dr Isa Ryan joins Ethics Talk to discuss her article, coauthored with Dr Ashish Premkumar and Professor Katie Watson: “Why the Post-Roe Era Requires Protecting Conscientious Provision as We Protect Conscientious Refusal in Health Care.” Case and Commentary Feb 2005 Quality of Life and Prenatal Decisions, Commentary 1 Ludger Schols, MD Virtual Mentor. 2005;7(2):136-140. doi: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2005.7.2.ccas1-0502. Case and Commentary Feb 2005 Quality of Life and Prenatal Decisions, Commentary 2 Georg Marckmann, MD Virtual Mentor. 2005;7(2):136-140. doi: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2005.7.2.ccas1-0502. Viewpoint Jan 2006 Is Prenatal Genetic Screening Unjustly Discriminatory? Jeff McMahan, PhD Virtual Mentor. 2006;8(1):50-52. doi: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2006.8.1.oped1-0601. Viewpoint Jan 2006 The Uncertain Rationale for Prenatal Disability Screening David Wasserman, JD and Adrienne Asch, PhD Virtual Mentor. 2006;8(1):53-56. doi: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2006.8.1.oped2-0601. Case and Commentary Jan 2004 Campaign Posters in the Clinic, Commentary 1 Marion Danis, MD Virtual Mentor. 2004;6(1):6-8. doi: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2004.6.1.ccas1-0401. Case and Commentary Jan 2004 Campaign Posters in the Clinic, Commentary 2 Leonard M. Fleck, PhD Virtual Mentor. 2004;6(1):9-11. doi: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2004.6.1.ccas1-0401. Pagination Current page 1 Page 2 Next page Next › Last page Last »
Case and Commentary Mar 2022 Alignment of Abolition Medicine With Reproductive Justice Crystal M. Hayes, PhD, MSW and Anu Manchikanti Gomez, PhD Abolition medicine and reproductive justice are synergistic approaches that advance a radical vision of a racially just world. AMA J Ethics. 2022;24(3):E188-193. doi: 10.1001/amajethics.2022.188.
State of the Art and Science Apr 2016 Keeping the Backdoor to Eugenics Ajar?: Disability and the Future of Prenatal Screening Gareth M. Thomas, PhD and Barbara Katz Rothman, PhD Noninvasive prenatal testing arguably constitutes a form of eugenics in a social context in which certain reproductive outcomes are not valued. AMA J Ethics. 2016;18(4):406-415. doi: 10.1001/journalofethics.2016.18.4.stas1-1604.
Viewpoint Sep 2022 Why the Post-Roe Era Requires Protecting Conscientious Provision as We Protect Conscientious Refusal in Health Care Isa Ryan, MD, MSc, Ashish Premkumar, MD, and Katie Watson, JD Extraordinary changes to the legal landscape of abortion care require reevaluating health professionals’ appropriation of conscience. AMA J Ethics. 2022;24(9):E906-912. doi: 10.1001/amajethics.2022.906.
Podcast Sep 2022 Author Interview: “Why the Post-Roe Era Requires Protecting Conscientious Provision as We Protect Conscientious Refusal in Health Care” Dr Isa Ryan joins Ethics Talk to discuss her article, coauthored with Dr Ashish Premkumar and Professor Katie Watson: “Why the Post-Roe Era Requires Protecting Conscientious Provision as We Protect Conscientious Refusal in Health Care.”
Case and Commentary Feb 2005 Quality of Life and Prenatal Decisions, Commentary 1 Ludger Schols, MD Virtual Mentor. 2005;7(2):136-140. doi: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2005.7.2.ccas1-0502.
Case and Commentary Feb 2005 Quality of Life and Prenatal Decisions, Commentary 2 Georg Marckmann, MD Virtual Mentor. 2005;7(2):136-140. doi: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2005.7.2.ccas1-0502.
Viewpoint Jan 2006 Is Prenatal Genetic Screening Unjustly Discriminatory? Jeff McMahan, PhD Virtual Mentor. 2006;8(1):50-52. doi: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2006.8.1.oped1-0601.
Viewpoint Jan 2006 The Uncertain Rationale for Prenatal Disability Screening David Wasserman, JD and Adrienne Asch, PhD Virtual Mentor. 2006;8(1):53-56. doi: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2006.8.1.oped2-0601.
Case and Commentary Jan 2004 Campaign Posters in the Clinic, Commentary 1 Marion Danis, MD Virtual Mentor. 2004;6(1):6-8. doi: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2004.6.1.ccas1-0401.
Case and Commentary Jan 2004 Campaign Posters in the Clinic, Commentary 2 Leonard M. Fleck, PhD Virtual Mentor. 2004;6(1):9-11. doi: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2004.6.1.ccas1-0401.