Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Hastings Cent Rep ; 54(2): 34-43, 2024 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38639162

ABSTRACT

I consider the question of what moral obligations prospective parents owe to their future children. It is taken as an almost axiomatic premise of a wide range of philosophical arguments that prospective parents have a moral obligation to take such steps as ensuring their own financial stability or waiting until they are emotionally mature before conceiving. This is because it is assumed that parents have a moral obligation to lay the groundwork for their children's lives to go well. While at first glance such a premise seems benign, I will argue that when it is applied to arguments in assisted reproductive technology, as it is in Julian Savulescu's procreative beneficence argument or as it is in Daniel Groll's recent argument for open gamete donation, we see problems with this premise. Problems in Groll's argument also become apparent when it is scrutinized in connection with this premise.


Subject(s)
Preimplantation Diagnosis , Pregnancy , Child , Female , Humans , Prospective Studies , Reproduction , Reproductive Techniques, Assisted , Parents , Moral Obligations
2.
Animals (Basel) ; 13(17)2023 Sep 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37685052

ABSTRACT

Freya the Walrus, who often climbed onto docked boats to sunbathe and frolic, was euthanized by the Norwegian Department of Fisheries in the Oslo fjord in August 2022, sparking international outrage and media attention. Since walruses are social animals, and since the Anthropocene era of climate change has displaced animals from their Arctic homes, forcing them to migrate, we can expect more human-animal interactions at such places as marinas, where Freya met her end. This paper asks and attempts to answer how we can make such interactions just going forward? In cases such as Freya's, we need to reconcile three competing interests: the animal's interest in living a flourishing life as best they can in a changing climate; the public's interest in a safe and fulfilling wildlife encounter with an animal they have come to know intimately enough to name and follow devotedly on social media; and interests in maintaining private property. Examining these interests through the philosophical lenses of co-sovereignty, capability, and individuality, however, will yield more just results for animals in similar situations of conflict and co-existence with humans in urban spaces. We argue that, going forward, state resources should be expended to safeguard the public from marina access if safety is a genuine concern, while private money should be spent by marinas to enact safe animal removal with a no-kill policy.

3.
Int J Lang Commun Disord ; 45(2): 174-81, 2010.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22748030

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: A survey of clinicians made by Joffe and Pring in 2008 revealed that different approaches exist between researchers and clinicians in the treatment of children with phonological problems. Researchers have examined specific approaches to treatment often giving substantial amounts of therapy and have obtained encouraging results; clinicians, with less time available, often use an eclectic approach mixing different treatment methods. The reasons for this difference are discussed. AIMS: We examined the effectiveness of an eclectic approach giving amounts of therapy more consistent with clinical practice and involving parents in treating their children. METHODS & PROCEDURES: We report two small experiments conducted within Speech and Language Therapy clinics. In the first, a group of treated children are compared with a group of children whose treatment is delayed. Parents attended therapy sessions and were given homework tasks to do with their children. The second compared children treated as in the first experiment with children treated at home by their parents who had attended training sessions and with untreated children. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: In the first experiment, a general trend towards improvement was seen in all children. Change during treatment periods was statistically significant. In the second experiment, children treated by therapists showed strongly significant gains. Lesser but significant gains were made by children treated by their parents; no change was found in untreated children. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: The findings offer encouragement to clinicians who use an eclectic approach and who are only able to offer limited amounts of therapy. They also suggest that parental involvement is helpful. However, we find the current incompatibility of research and clinical work worrying and a hindrance to our efforts to understand and treat these children.


Subject(s)
Articulation Disorders/therapy , Early Intervention, Educational , Language Development Disorders/therapy , Speech Therapy/methods , Child, Preschool , Community Health Services , Female , Humans , Male , Parents , Treatment Outcome
4.
BMJ ; 325(7373): 1152, 2002 Nov 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-12433766

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate two methods for identifying speech and language problems in preschool children. DESIGN: Prospective population based study. SETTING: Inner London. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: 37 health visitors were randomly assigned to use a structured screening test (18) or a parent led method (19). Of 623 eligible children aged 30-36 months, the parents of 582 agreed to participate (353 using the structured test and 229 the parent led method). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Children were assessed by a speech and language therapist blinded to the test result, using the Reynell developmental language scales. Children were classified as having "severe language problems" if the Reynell score was below the third centile for receptive language and as "needing therapy" if the Reynell score was below the seventh centile for receptive or expressive language and clinical opinion. RESULTS: Reference assessments and usable scores were obtained for 458 (97%) of the 474 children screened. 98 (21%) children had severe language problems and 131 (29%) needed therapy. The sensitivity and specificity for the structured screening test were 66% (95% confidence interval 53% to 76%) and 89% (85% to 93%) respectively for severe language problems and 54% (43% to 65%) and 90% (85% to 93%) for those needing therapy. The sensitivity and specificity for referral by the parent led method were 56% (40% to 71%) and 85% (78% to 90%) for severe language problems and 58% (44% to 71%) and 90% (83% to 94%) for those needing speech and language therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Both approaches failed to detect a substantial proportion of children with severe language problems and led to over-referral for diagnostic assessments. Screening is likely to be an ineffective approach to the management of speech and language problems in preschool children in this population.


Subject(s)
Language Disorders/diagnosis , Mass Screening/standards , Parents , Speech Disorders/diagnosis , Child, Preschool , Community Health Nursing , Humans , Mass Screening/methods , Sensitivity and Specificity
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...