Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/2440/89424
Citations
Scopus Web of Science® Altmetric
?
?
Type: Journal article
Title: Should we replace disabled newborn infants?
Author: Wilkinson, D.
Citation: Journal of Moral Philosophy, 2011; 8(3):390-414
Publisher: Brill Academic Publishers
Issue Date: 2011
ISSN: 1740-4681
1745-5243
Statement of
Responsibility: 
Dominic Wilkinson
Abstract: If a disabled newborn infant dies, her parents may be able to conceive another child without impairment. This is sometimes referred to as 'replacement'. Some philosophers have argued that replacement provides a strong reason for disabled newborns to be killed or allowed to die. In this paper I focus on the case for replacement as it relates to decisions about life support in newborn intensive care. I argue (following Jeff McMahan) that the impersonal reason to replace is weak and easily outweighed. I assess and reject several possible ways in which the impersonal reason to replace could be defended. I then address an alternative justification for replacement – as an individual-affecting benefit. The strongest justification for replacement may be the interests of parents. In the latter part of the paper I look at a related question. What role should replacement play in decisions about the funding of newborn intensive care?
Keywords: Impersonal reasons; Newborns; Replacement; Utilitarianism; Withdrawing treatment
Rights: © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2011
RMID: 0030015509
DOI: 10.1163/174552411X591348
Appears in Collections:Paediatrics publications

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.