Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-cjp7w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-15T19:07:07.231Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

12 - Feminist Empirical Bioethics

from Part II - Practical Perspectives

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 February 2017

By
Jackie Leach Scully
Edited by
Jonathan Ives ,
Michael Dunn  and
Alan Cribb
Jonathan Ives
Affiliation:
University of Bristol
Michael Dunn
Affiliation:
University of Oxford
Alan Cribb
Affiliation:
King's College London
Get access
Type
Chapter
Information
Empirical Bioethics
Theoretical and Practical Perspectives
 , pp. 195 - 221
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2016

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ackerly, B., True, J. 2008. Reflexivity in Practice: Power and Ethics in Feminist Research on International Relations. International Studies Review. 10(4):693–707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alcoff, L. 2010. Epistemic Identities. Episteme. 7:128–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alcoff, L.M. 2006. Visible Identities, Race, Gender, and the Self. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anstey, K.W. 2002. Are Attempts to Have Hearing-Impaired Children Justifiable? Journal of Medical Ethics. 28:286–288.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baier, A. 1995. Moral Prejudices. Essays on Ethics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Banks, S., Scully, J.L., Shakespeare, T. 2006. Ordinary Ethics: Lay People’s Deliberations on Social Sex Selection. New Genetics and Society. 25:289–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartky, S.L. 1990. Femininity and Domination: Studies in the Phenomenology of Oppression. London: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
Baylis, F., McLeod, C. 2007. The Stem Cell Debate Continues: The Buying and Selling of Eggs for Research. Journal of Medical Ethics. 33(12):726–731.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Borry, P., Schotsmans, P., Dierickx, K. 2005. The Birth of the Empirical Turn in Bioethics. Bioethics. 19:49–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brown, M. 2013. No ethical bypass of moral status in stem cell research. Bioethics. 27(1):12–19CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carse, A.L., Nelson, H.L. 1996. Rehabilitating Care. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal. 6(1):19–35.Google ScholarPubMed
Code, L. 2006. Ecological Knowing: The Politics of Epistemic Location. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Code, L. 1991. What Can She Know? Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Vries, R., Turner, L., Orfali, K., Bosk, C. 2007. The View from Here: Bioethics and the Social Sciences. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Dickenson, D. 2006. The Lady Vanishes: What’s Missing from the Stem Cell Debate. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry. 3(1–2): 43–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckenwiler, E. 2013. Long-Term Care, Globalization, and Justice. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Edwards, R., Mauthner, M. 2012. Ethics and Feminist Research: Theory and Practice. In Ethics in Qualitative Research, Miller, T., Birch, M., Mauthner, M., Jessop, J. (eds.). London: Sage. 14–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finch, J. 1984. ‘It’s Great to Have Someone to Talk To.’ Ethics and Politics of Interviewing Women. In Social Researching: Politics, Problems, Practice, Bell, C., Roberts, H. (eds.). London: Routledge. 70–87.Google Scholar
Fitzpatrick, P., Scully, J.L. 2010. Introduction to Feminist Bioethics. In Feminist Bioethics: At the Center, on the Margins, Scully, J.L., Baldwin-Ragaven, L.E., Fitzpatrick, P. (eds.). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. 1–9.Google Scholar
Fricker, M. 2007. Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilligan, C. 1982. In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Harding, S. 1993. Rethinking Standpoint Epistemology: What Is ‘Strong Objectivity’? In Feminist Epistemologies, Alcoff, L., Potter, E. (eds.). London: Routledge. 49–82.Google Scholar
Harding, S. 1991. Whose Science? Whose Knowledge? Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Harding, S., Norburg, K. 2005. New Feminist Approaches to Social Science Methodologies. An Introduction. Signs. 30:2009–2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartsock, N. 1987. The Feminist Standpoint: Developing the Ground for a Specifically Feminist Historical Materialism. In Feminism and Methodology: Social Science Issues, Harding, S. (ed.). Bloomington: Indiana University Press. 157–180.Google Scholar
Hayri, M. 2010. The Moral Contestedness of Selecting ‘Deaf Embryos’. In Arguing about Disability: Philosophical Perspectives, Kristiansen, K., Vehmas, S., Shakespeare, T. (eds.). London: Routledge. 154–168.Google Scholar
Hayri, M. 2004. There Is a Difference between Selecting a Deaf Embryo and Deafening a Hearing Child. Journal of Medical Ethics. 30:510–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hedgecoe, A.M. 2004. Critical Bioethics: Beyond the Social Science Critique of Applied Ethics. Bioethics. 18:120–140.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hekman, S. 1997. Truth and Method: Feminist Standpoint Theory Revisited. Signs. 22(2):341–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoeyer, K. 2006. ‘Ethics Wars’: Reflections on the Antagonism between Bioethicists and Social Science Observers of Biomedicine. Human Studies. 29(2):203–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holland, S., Lebacq, K., Zoloth, J. 2001. The Human Embryonic Stem Cell Debate: Science, Ethics and Public Policy. Cambridge: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holm, S., Jonas, M. 2004. Engaging the World: The Use of Empirical Research in Bioethics and the Regulation of Biotechnology. Amsterdam: IOS Press.Google Scholar
Hookway, C. 2010. Some Varieties of Epistemic Injustice: Reflections on Fricker. Episteme. 7:151–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes, C., Cohen, R.L. 2010. Feminists Really Do Count: The Complexity of Feminist Methodologies. International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 13(3):189–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ives, J. 2014. A Method of Reflexive Balancing in a Pragmatic, Interdisciplinary and Reflexive Bioethics. Bioethics. 28(6):302–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ives, J., Dunn, M. 2010. Who’s Arguing? A Call for Reflexivity in Bioethics. Bioethics. 24(5):256–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jaggar, A.M. 2000. Ethics Naturalized: Feminism’s Contribution to Moral Epistemology. Metaphilosophy. 31:452–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jaggar, A. 1991. Feminist Ethics: Projects, Problems, Prospects. In Feminist Ethics, Card, C. (ed.). Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
Johnston, T. 2005. In One’s Own Image: Ethics and the Reproduction of Deafness. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education. 10:426–441.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kittay, E.F. 2008. Ideal Theory and the Exclusion of People with Severe Cognitive Disabilities. In Naturalized Bioethics: Toward Responsible Knowing and Practice, Lindemann, H.N., Verkerk, M., Walker, M.U. (eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 218–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kittay, E.F. 1999. Love’s Labor: Essays on Women, Equality, and Dependency. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kittay, E.F., Feder, E.K. (eds.) 2002. The Subject of Care: Feminist Perspectives on Dependency. Totowa, NJ: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Landeweer, E., Molewijk, B., Widdershoven, G. 2016. Moral Improvement through Interactive Research: A Practice Example of Dialogical Empirical Ethics. This volume.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lanoix, M. 2013. Labor as Embodied Practice: The Lessons of Care Work. Hypatia. 28(1):85–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Letherby, G. 2003. Feminist Research in Theory and Practice. London: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Levy, N. 2002. Deafness, Culture and Choice. Journal of Medical Ethics. 28:284–285.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lindemann Nelson, H. 2000. Feminist Bioethics: Where We’ve Been, Where We’re Going. Metaphilosophy. 31(5):492–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindemann, H.N., Verkerk, M., Walker, M.U. 2008. Naturalized Bioethics: Toward Responsible Knowing and Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackenzie, C., Scully, J.L. 2007. Moral Imagination, Disability and Embodiment. Journal of Applied Philosophy. 24:335–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackenzie, C., Stoljar, N. (eds.) 2000. Relational Autonomy: Feminist Perspectives on Autonomy, Agency, and the Social Self. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLaughlin, J. 2003. Feminist Social and Political Theory. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McMillan, J. 2016. Empirical Bioethics and the Fact/Value Distinction. This volume.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mundy, L. 2002. A World of Their Own. Washington Post Magazine. 31 March 2002.Google Scholar
Pellegrino, E. 1995. The Limitation of Empirical Research in Ethics. The Journal of Clinical Ethics. 6:161–162.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ramazanoglu, C., Holland, J. 2007. Feminist Methodology: Challenges and Choices. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Rehmann-Sutter, C. 2010. ‘It Is Her Problem, Not Ours’: Contributions of Feminist Bioethics to the Mainstream. In Feminist Bioethics: At the Center, on the Margins, Scully, J.L., Baldwin-Ragaven, L., Fitzpatrick, P. (eds.), Baltimore MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. 23–44.Google Scholar
Savulescu, J. 2007. In Defence of Procreative Beneficence. Journal of Medical Ethics. 33:284–288.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Savulescu, J. 2002. Deaf Lesbians, ‘Designer Disability’, and the Future of Medicine. BMJ. 325(7367):771–773.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scully, J.L. 2011. ‘Choosing Disability’, Symbolic Law, and the Media. Medical Law International. 11(3):197–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scully, J.L. 2008. Disability Bioethics: Moral Bodies, Moral Difference. Totowa, NJ: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Scully, J.L., Baldwin-Ragaven, L.E. and Fitzpatrick, P. (eds.) 2010. Feminist Bioethics: At the Center, on the Margins. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scully, J.L., Banks, S., Song, R. and Haq, J. Experiences of faith group members using new reproductive and genetic technologies: a qualitative interview stud. Human Fertility (in press). http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14647273.2016.1243816.Google Scholar
Sheehan, M. 2016. Metaethics, Relativism and Empirical Bioethics. This volume.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shildrick, M. 2008. The Critical Turn in Feminist Bioethics: The Case of Heart Transplantation. International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics, 1:28–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanley, L., Wise, S. 1993. Breaking Out Again: Feminist Ontology and Epistemology. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Tong, R. 2013a. Feminist Thought: A More Comprehensive Introduction. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tong, R. 2013b. International Migrant Eldercare Workers in Italy, Germany and Sweden: A Feminist Critique of Eldercare Policy in the United States. IJFAB. 6:41–59.Google Scholar
Tong, R. 1997. Feminist Approaches to Bioethics: Theoretical Reflections and Practical Applications. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Tronto, J. 1993. Moral Boundaries: A Political Argument for an Ethic of Care. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Turner, L. 2009. Anthropological and sociological critiques of bioethics. Bioethical Inquiry. 6:83–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Twine, R. 2010. Broadening the Feminism in Feminist Bioethics. In Naturalized Bioethics: Toward Responsible Knowing and Practice, Lindemann, H.N., Verkerk, M., Walker, M.U. (eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 45–59.Google Scholar
Twine, R. 2005. Constructing Critical Bioethics by Deconstruction Culture/Nature Dualism. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy. 8(3):285–295.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walker, M.U. 1998. Moral Understandings: A Feminist Study in Ethics. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Walker, M.U. 2010. Groningen Naturalism in Bioethics. In Naturalized Bioethics: Toward Responsible Knowing and Practice, Lindemann, H.N., Verkerk, M., Walker, M.U. (eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1–20.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, S. 1998. Focus Groups in Feminist Research: Power, Interaction, and the Co-Construction of Meaning. Women’s Studies International Forum, 21(1):111–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wylie, A. 2003. Why Standpoint Matters. In Science and Other Cultures. Issues in Philosophies of Science and Technology, Figueroa, R., Harding, S. (eds.). Oxford and New York: Routledge. 26–48.Google Scholar
Young, I.M. 2005. On Female Body Experience: ‘Throwing Like a Girl’ and Other Essays. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zussman, R. 2000. The Contributions of Sociology to Medical Ethics. Hastings Center Report. 30:7–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×