Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
utsfl:classroom:seminars:pba401h [2013/09/29 20:39] – 99 balloons balleyne | utsfl:classroom:seminars:pba401h [2017/02/05 20:34] (current) – mmccann | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
- | ====== PBA401H: Complications in Pregnancy | + | ====== PBA401H ====== |
- | Prerequisites: | + | |
- | * congenital disorders; pre-natal screening, amniocentisis; | + | |
- | * Genetic abnormalities: | + | |
- | * anencephaly | + | |
- | * Fetal Alcohol Syndrome | + | |
- | * trivial: cleft palate | + | |
- | * double effect: ectopic pregnancy | + | |
- | ===== Resources ===== | + | * [[http:// |
- | * [[https:// | + | * Fetal origins (Annie Murphy Paul): |
+ | * FIXME (placement??) **[[http:// | ||
+ | * Q: "f you consider an embryo to have human rights no matter the status of its brain development, | ||
+ | In other words, where do you draw the line between when it is humane to "pull the plug" on an embryo versus a brain dead patient? If they have the same mental capacities (none), then why would one be okay to kill over another?" | ||
+ | |||
+ | * A: "What makes the first link so insightful as regards to your question, is that Dr. Condic points out that brain death criteria is what should cause us to conclude that we should protect the pre-born, rather than not protect them. She writes, | ||
+ | |||
+ | " | ||
+ | |||
+ | Dr. Condic further explains the nature of the living embryo, as follows: | ||
+ | |||
+ | " | ||
+ | |||
+ | "What does the nature of death tell us about the beginning of human life? From the earliest stages of development, | ||
+ | |||
+ | What I like to point out to people is this: A **brain dead person** is dead because they have complete and total, irreversible cessation of the entire brain. | ||
+ | |||
+ | One final point I'd make is this: **In the case of a truly brain dead person, there is no ethical dilemma about " |