Making Things Right When Reproductive Medicine Goes Wrong: Reply to Robert Rabin, Carol Sanger, and Gregory Keating
2018
- 1Usage
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage1
- Abstract Views1
Article Description
Why does U.S. law turn a blind eye when OB/GYN doctors foist unwanted procreation? Or when fertility clinics deny parenthood to those desperate to form a family? Or when sperm banks disrupt plans for offspring with particular genetic traits? This is a reply to three critiques of my essay on Reproductive Negligence, 117 Colum. L. Rev. 149. (2017), https://ssrn.com/abstract=2758208. Professors Robert Rabin, Carol Sanger, and Gregory Keating ask: Are these injuries too slight, squishy, or subjective to compensate? Are my proposed remedies doomed by the moral politics of abortion? Didn't fertility patients whose frozen sperm or eggs got destroyed already have low chances of conceiving? Can they really be said to have "lost" a child they never had? And can’t they still adopt anyway? Just like someone who's made pregnant against her will can still end it? Besides, aren’t children blessings? And don’t parents come to love the one they have? These are among the questions that I answer here by reference to recent cases involving botched birth control, dropped embryos, and donor mix-ups.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know