Search Results Search Sort by RelevanceMost Recent Case and Commentary Apr 2016 Prenatal Risk Assessment and Diagnosis of Down Syndrome: Strategies for Communicating Well with Patients Eva Schwartz, MD and Kishore Vellody, MD Physicians should provide women considering abortion after Down syndrome screening with unbiased information and not attempt to influence their decision. AMA J Ethics. 2016;18(4):359-364. doi: 10.1001/journalofethics.2016.18.4.ecas1-1604. In the Literature Apr 2016 A Defense of “The Case for Conserving Disability” Jasmine Zahid Rosemarie Garland-Thomson’s argument for disability as a sociocultural resource challenges the commonsense understanding of disability as a deficit. AMA J Ethics. 2016;18(4):399-405. doi: 10.1001/journalofethics.2016.18.4.nlit2-1604. 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 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 Sep 2007 Pregnant Women and Cervical Cancer: Balancing Best Interest of Mother and Fetus Watson A. Bowes, Jr., MD Virtual Mentor. 2007;9(9):600-604. doi: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2007.9.9.ccas1-0709. Case and Commentary Sep 2007 Assisted Reproduction and Primum Non Nocere Marta Kolthoff, MD Virtual Mentor. 2007;9(9):605-610. doi: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2007.9.9.ccas2-0709. Case and Commentary Sep 2004 Reproductive Rights, Commentary 1 Watson A. Bowes Jr., MD Virtual Mentor. 2004;6(9):387-389. doi: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2004.6.9.ccas2-0409. Case and Commentary Sep 2004 Reproductive Rights, Commentary 2 Karen E. Adams, MD and Martin T. Donohoe, MD Virtual Mentor. 2004;6(9):389-391. doi: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2004.6.9.ccas2-0409. Original Research Mar 2018 Structural Competency and Reproductive Health Margaret Mary Downey, MSW and Anu Manchikanti Gómez, MSc, PhD Structural competency helps physicians address reproductive health disparities through recognizing social determinants of health and social advocacy. AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(3):211-223. doi: 10.1001/journalofethics.2018.20.3.peer1-1803. Pagination Current page 1 Page 2 Next page Next › Last page Last »
Case and Commentary Apr 2016 Prenatal Risk Assessment and Diagnosis of Down Syndrome: Strategies for Communicating Well with Patients Eva Schwartz, MD and Kishore Vellody, MD Physicians should provide women considering abortion after Down syndrome screening with unbiased information and not attempt to influence their decision. AMA J Ethics. 2016;18(4):359-364. doi: 10.1001/journalofethics.2016.18.4.ecas1-1604.
In the Literature Apr 2016 A Defense of “The Case for Conserving Disability” Jasmine Zahid Rosemarie Garland-Thomson’s argument for disability as a sociocultural resource challenges the commonsense understanding of disability as a deficit. AMA J Ethics. 2016;18(4):399-405. doi: 10.1001/journalofethics.2016.18.4.nlit2-1604.
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 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 Sep 2007 Pregnant Women and Cervical Cancer: Balancing Best Interest of Mother and Fetus Watson A. Bowes, Jr., MD Virtual Mentor. 2007;9(9):600-604. doi: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2007.9.9.ccas1-0709.
Case and Commentary Sep 2007 Assisted Reproduction and Primum Non Nocere Marta Kolthoff, MD Virtual Mentor. 2007;9(9):605-610. doi: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2007.9.9.ccas2-0709.
Case and Commentary Sep 2004 Reproductive Rights, Commentary 1 Watson A. Bowes Jr., MD Virtual Mentor. 2004;6(9):387-389. doi: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2004.6.9.ccas2-0409.
Case and Commentary Sep 2004 Reproductive Rights, Commentary 2 Karen E. Adams, MD and Martin T. Donohoe, MD Virtual Mentor. 2004;6(9):389-391. doi: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2004.6.9.ccas2-0409.
Original Research Mar 2018 Structural Competency and Reproductive Health Margaret Mary Downey, MSW and Anu Manchikanti Gómez, MSc, PhD Structural competency helps physicians address reproductive health disparities through recognizing social determinants of health and social advocacy. AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(3):211-223. doi: 10.1001/journalofethics.2018.20.3.peer1-1803.