Singling out the double effect - sexual health advice and contraception are ethically distinct

S. Bow
{"title":"Singling out the double effect - sexual health advice and contraception are ethically distinct","authors":"S. Bow","doi":"10.1080/17571472.2015.1082341","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article is a response to an article previously published in LJPC, which employed the doctrine of double effect to explain the Gillick judgement and exculpate health care workers who provide contraceptives and sexual health advice to under-16s. In this analysis, the two acts: provision of contraceptives and provision of sexual health advice are examined separately against the four criteria of the doctrine of double effect. In conclusion, whilst sexual health advice provision fits into the doctrine reasonably well, in the case of contraceptive provision, the validity of the doctrine of double effect is more doubtful.","PeriodicalId":89823,"journal":{"name":"London journal of primary care","volume":"7 1","pages":"92 - 95"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17571472.2015.1082341","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"London journal of primary care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17571472.2015.1082341","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Abstract This article is a response to an article previously published in LJPC, which employed the doctrine of double effect to explain the Gillick judgement and exculpate health care workers who provide contraceptives and sexual health advice to under-16s. In this analysis, the two acts: provision of contraceptives and provision of sexual health advice are examined separately against the four criteria of the doctrine of double effect. In conclusion, whilst sexual health advice provision fits into the doctrine reasonably well, in the case of contraceptive provision, the validity of the doctrine of double effect is more doubtful.
挑出双重效应——性健康建议和避孕在伦理上是截然不同的
本文是对先前发表在LJPC上的一篇文章的回应,该文章采用双重效应理论来解释Gillick判决,并为向16岁以下青少年提供避孕药具和性健康建议的卫生保健工作者开脱。在这一分析中,根据双重效果原则的四个标准分别审查了两项行为:提供避孕药具和提供性健康咨询。总之,虽然性健康咨询的规定相当符合该原则,但在提供避孕药具的情况下,双重效果原则的有效性更值得怀疑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书