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. 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. Policy Forum May 2007 The Principle of Double Effect and Proportionate Reason Nicholas J. Kockler, MS, PhD Virtual Mentor. 2007;9(5):369-374. doi: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2007.9.5.pfor2-0705. 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. Policy Forum May 2003 The Virtue of Drawing Lines in Genetic Testing Rosemarie Tong, PhD Virtual Mentor. 2003;5(5):186-189. doi: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2003.5.5.pfor1-0305. Pagination Current page 1 Page 2 Page 3 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.
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.
Policy Forum May 2007 The Principle of Double Effect and Proportionate Reason Nicholas J. Kockler, MS, PhD Virtual Mentor. 2007;9(5):369-374. doi: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2007.9.5.pfor2-0705.
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.
Policy Forum May 2003 The Virtue of Drawing Lines in Genetic Testing Rosemarie Tong, PhD Virtual Mentor. 2003;5(5):186-189. doi: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2003.5.5.pfor1-0305.