| Title |
After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Medical Ethics, February 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1136/medethics-2011-100411 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alberto Giubilini, Francesca Minerva |
| Abstract |
Abortion is largely accepted even for reasons that do not have anything to do with the fetus' health. By showing that (1) both fetuses and newborns do not have the same moral status as actual persons, (2) the fact that both are potential persons is morally irrelevant and (3) adoption is not always in the best interest of actual people, the authors argue that what we call 'after-birth abortion' (killing a newborn) should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4,016 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 771 | 19% |
| United Kingdom | 184 | 5% |
| Brazil | 123 | 3% |
| Italy | 119 | 3% |
| Australia | 75 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 51 | 1% |
| Spain | 44 | 1% |
| Canada | 41 | 1% |
| Poland | 36 | <1% |
| Other | 342 | 9% |
| Unknown | 2230 | 56% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3816 | 95% |
| Scientists | 72 | 2% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 57 | 1% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 57 | 1% |
| Unknown | 14 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 378 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 5 | 1% |
| Italy | 3 | <1% |
| United States | 3 | <1% |
| Portugal | 2 | <1% |
| Spain | 2 | <1% |
| Austria | 2 | <1% |
| Canada | 2 | <1% |
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 12 | 3% |
| Unknown | 344 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 71 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 56 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 44 | 12% |
| Researcher | 39 | 10% |
| Other | 28 | 7% |
| Other | 92 | 24% |
| Unknown | 48 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 80 | 21% |
| Social Sciences | 47 | 12% |
| Philosophy | 42 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 34 | 9% |
| Arts and Humanities | 27 | 7% |
| Other | 92 | 24% |
| Unknown | 56 | 15% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3966. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 April 2024.
All research outputs
#1,265
of 25,789,020 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Ethics
#2
of 3,701 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4
of 169,828 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Ethics
#1
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,789,020 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,701 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 169,828 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.