@article{ref1,
title="Why a right to life rules out infanticide: a final reply to Räsänen",
journal="Bioethics",
year="2019",
author="Blackshaw, Bruce P. and Rodger, Daniel",
volume="ePub",
number="ePub",
pages="ePub-ePub",
abstract="Joona Räsänen has argued that pro-life arguments against the permissibility of infanticide are not persuasive, and fail to show it to be immoral. We responded to Räsänen's arguments, concluding that his critique of pro-life arguments was misplaced. Räsänen has recently replied in 'Why pro-life arguments still are not convincing: A reply to my critics', providing some additional arguments as to why he does not find pro-life arguments against infanticide convincing. Here, we respond briefly to Räsänen's critique of the substance view, and also to his most important claim: that possession of a right to life by an infant does not rule out the permissibility of infanticide. We demonstrate that this claim is unfounded, and conclude that Räsänen has not refuted pro-life arguments against infanticide.<br><br>© 2019 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.<p /> <p>Language: en</p>",
language="en",
issn="0269-9702",
doi="10.1111/bioe.12646",
url="http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12646"
}