{"title":"Corrigendum to: Attitudes, intentions and procreative responsibility in current and future assisted reproduction","authors":"","doi":"10.1111/bioe.13278","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Battisti, D. (2023). Attitudes, intentions and procreative responsibility in current and future assisted reproduction. <i>Bioethics, 37</i>(5), 449–461. https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.13150.</p><p>The name ‘McDougall’ is incorrectly spelled as ‘McDougal’ on pages 453 and 454.</p><p>The phrase ‘focus-agent focus’ on page 454 is incorrect and should read ‘future-agent focus’.</p><p>The part of the sentence \"implies the prospective parents\" should be replaced with \"commits\", and the word \"have\" in the same sentence should be replaced with \"having\". This sentence should read: \"Considering this, we can recognize that the parent-child relationship argument commits procreators to having attitudes and intentions that are not in contrast with the desires and hopes that their children's lives go well and that they are safe from suffering\" paragraph 4, page 456.</p><p>The word ‘having’ should be replaced with ‘parenting’ in the final paragraph of page 455. This sentence should read: ‘On the one hand, the distinction between creating and parenting a child enables us to justify the fact that the beginning of a parent–child relationship is also morally relevant in the procreative context’.</p><p>The word ‘having’ should be replaced with ‘creating’ on the first line of page 456. This sentence should read: ‘To explain the moral relevance of the distinction between creating and parenting a child let us consider again the example of the couple that, through PGD plus IVF, deliberately select a child with a disability D’.</p>","PeriodicalId":55379,"journal":{"name":"Bioethics","volume":"38 4","pages":"377"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/bioe.13278","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bioethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bioe.13278","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Battisti, D. (2023). Attitudes, intentions and procreative responsibility in current and future assisted reproduction. Bioethics, 37(5), 449–461. https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.13150.
The name ‘McDougall’ is incorrectly spelled as ‘McDougal’ on pages 453 and 454.
The phrase ‘focus-agent focus’ on page 454 is incorrect and should read ‘future-agent focus’.
The part of the sentence "implies the prospective parents" should be replaced with "commits", and the word "have" in the same sentence should be replaced with "having". This sentence should read: "Considering this, we can recognize that the parent-child relationship argument commits procreators to having attitudes and intentions that are not in contrast with the desires and hopes that their children's lives go well and that they are safe from suffering" paragraph 4, page 456.
The word ‘having’ should be replaced with ‘parenting’ in the final paragraph of page 455. This sentence should read: ‘On the one hand, the distinction between creating and parenting a child enables us to justify the fact that the beginning of a parent–child relationship is also morally relevant in the procreative context’.
The word ‘having’ should be replaced with ‘creating’ on the first line of page 456. This sentence should read: ‘To explain the moral relevance of the distinction between creating and parenting a child let us consider again the example of the couple that, through PGD plus IVF, deliberately select a child with a disability D’.
期刊介绍:
As medical technology continues to develop, the subject of bioethics has an ever increasing practical relevance for all those working in philosophy, medicine, law, sociology, public policy, education and related fields.
Bioethics provides a forum for well-argued articles on the ethical questions raised by current issues such as: international collaborative clinical research in developing countries; public health; infectious disease; AIDS; managed care; genomics and stem cell research. These questions are considered in relation to concrete ethical, legal and policy problems, or in terms of the fundamental concepts, principles and theories used in discussions of such problems.
Bioethics also features regular Background Briefings on important current debates in the field. These feature articles provide excellent material for bioethics scholars, teachers and students alike.