• PhilPapers
  • PhilPeople
  • PhilArchive
  • PhilEvents
  • PhilJobs
  • Sign in
PhilPeople
 
  • Sign in
  • News Feed
  • Find Philosophers
  • Departments
  • Radar
  • Help
 
profile-cover
Drag to reposition
profile picture

Carolyn McLeod

University of Western Ontario
  •  Home
  •  Publications
    71
    • Most Recent
    • Most Downloaded
    • Topics
  •  Events
    10
  •  News and Updates
    20

 More details
  • University of Western Ontario
    Department of Philosophy
    Distinguished Professor
Dalhousie University
Department of Philosophy
PhD, 1999
CV
Homepage
London, Ontario, Canada
0000-0002-0258-9117
Areas of Specialization
Feminist Philosophy
Applied Ethics
Moral Psychology
Trust
Reproductive Ethics
Areas of Interest
Ethics of Artificial Intelligence
The Metaphysics of Race, Misc
Transgender Issues, Misc
  • All publications (71)
  •  122
    Authenticity and the Hijacked Brain
    American Journal of Bioethics 2 (2): 62-63. 2002.
    A review of Louis Charland's paper, "Cynthia's Dilemma: Consenting to Heroin Prescription," American Journal of Bioethics 2(2), 2002: 37-47.
    Biomedical EthicsCompulsion and Addiction
  •  45
    Morally Justifying Oncofertility Research
    In Teresa Woodruff, Lori Zoloth, Lisa Campo-Engelstein & Susan Rodriguez (eds.), Oncofertility: Reflections from the Humanities and Social Sciences, Springer. pp. 187-194. 2010.
    Is research aimed at preserving the fertility of cancer patients morally justified? A satisfying answer to this question is missing from the literature on oncofertility. Rather than providing an answer, which is impossible to do in a short space, this chapter explains what it would take to provide such justification.
    Morality of ProcreationMedical Research EthicsParenthood
  •  91
    A Review of Diagnosis Difference: The Moral Authority of Medicine, by Abby Wilkerson (review)
    Ethics 111 (3): 670. 2001.
    Feminist Bioethics
  •  138
    Rich Discussion About Reproductive Autonomy
    Bioethics 23 (1). 2008.
    An introduction to a special issue of Bioethics edited by McLeod and called Understanding and Protecting Reproductive Autonomy.
    Autonomy in Applied EthicsFeminism: AutonomyFeminist BioethicsBiomedical Ethics
  •  1167
    Harm or Mere Inconvenience? Denying Women Emergency Contraception
    Hypatia 25 (1): 11-30. 2010.
    This paper addresses the likely impact on women of being denied emergency contraception (EC) by pharmacists who conscientiously refuse to provide it. A common view—defended by Elizabeth Fenton and Loren Lomasky, among others—is that these refusals inconvenience rather than harm women so long as the women can easily get EC somewhere else nearby. I argue from a feminist perspective that the refusals harm women even when they can easily get EC somewhere else nearby.
    Reproductive EthicsContraceptionHealth Care JusticeFeminism: ReproductionFeminist BioethicsProfessio…Read more
    Reproductive EthicsContraceptionHealth Care JusticeFeminism: ReproductionFeminist BioethicsProfessional Ethics, MiscFeminist Ethics
  •  479
    Conscientious Refusal and Access to Abortion and Contraception
    with Chloe Fitzgerald
    In John D. Arras, Rebecca Kukla & Elizabeth Fenton (eds.), Routledge Companion to Bioethics, Routledge. pp. 343-356. 2015.
    An overview of the philosophical and bioethics literature on conscientious refusals by health care professionals to provide abortion and contraceptive services.
    ContraceptionAbortion
  •  149
    Licensing Parents in International Contract Pregnancies
    with Andrew Botterell
    Journal of Applied Philosophy 33 (2): 178-196. 2015.
    The Hague Conference on Private International Law currently has a Parentage/Surrogacy Project, which evaluates the legal status of children in cross-border situations, including situations involving international contract pregnancy. Should a convention focusing on international contract pregnancy emerge from this project, it will need to be consistent with the Hague convention on Intercountry Adoption. The latter convention prohibits adoptions unless, among other things, ‘the competent authoriti…Read more
    The Hague Conference on Private International Law currently has a Parentage/Surrogacy Project, which evaluates the legal status of children in cross-border situations, including situations involving international contract pregnancy. Should a convention focusing on international contract pregnancy emerge from this project, it will need to be consistent with the Hague convention on Intercountry Adoption. The latter convention prohibits adoptions unless, among other things, ‘the competent authorities of the receiving State have determined that the prospective adoptive parents are eligible and suited to adopt’. Included in it, therefore, is a parental vetting or licensing requirement. In our view, a similar requirement must also appear in any Hague Convention on international contract pregnancy if the two conventions are to be ethically consistent with one another. In particular, there should be a licensing requirement in such a convention for at least some of the prospective parents in contract pregnancy arrangements. We consider several arguments against this conclusion, and argue that none of them is successful.
    Responsibility in Applied EthicsParental RightsChildren's Well-BeingFamily Ethics, Misc
  •  2445
    Justification for Conscience Exemptions in Health Care
    with Lori Kantymir
    Bioethics 27 (8): 16-23. 2013.
    Some bioethicists argue that conscientious objectors in health care should have to justify themselves, just as objectors in the military do. They should have to provide reasons that explain why they should be exempt from offering the services that they find offensive. There are two versions of this view in the literature, each giving different standards of justification. We show these views are each either too permissive (i.e. would result in problematic exemptions based on conscience) or too re…Read more
    Some bioethicists argue that conscientious objectors in health care should have to justify themselves, just as objectors in the military do. They should have to provide reasons that explain why they should be exempt from offering the services that they find offensive. There are two versions of this view in the literature, each giving different standards of justification. We show these views are each either too permissive (i.e. would result in problematic exemptions based on conscience) or too restrictive (i.e. would produce problematic denials of exemption). We then develop a middle ground position that we believe better combines respect for the conscience of healthcare professionals with concern for the duties that they owe to patients. Our claim, in short, is that insofar as objectors should have to justify themselves, they should have to do it according to the standard that we defend rather than according to the standards that others have developed
    Biomedical Ethics, MiscProfessional Ethics, Misc
  •  64
    A Review of Dilemmas of Trust, by Trudy Govier (review)
    with Stephen Burns
    The Dalhousie Review 79 (1): 130-132. 1999.
    Ethical Theories, MiscMoral Dilemmas, MiscMoral Phenomena, Misc
  •  66
    Let Conscience Be Their Guide? Conscientious Refusals in Health Care
    with Jocelyn Downie
    Bioethics 28 (1). 2013.
    The introduction to a special issue of the journal Bioethics that we edited.
    Biomedical Ethics, Miscellaneous
  •  47
    A Review of A Feminist I: Reflections from Academia, by Christine Overall (review)
    Resources for Feminist Research 29 (1/2): 141-144. 2001.
    Feminist Philosophy, Misc
  • Prev.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • Next
PhilPeople logo

On this site

  • Find a philosopher
  • Find a department
  • The Radar
  • Index of professional philosophers
  • Index of departments
  • Help
  • Acknowledgments
  • Careers
  • Contact us
  • Terms and conditions

Brought to you by

  • The PhilPapers Foundation
  • The American Philosophical Association
  • Centre for Digital Philosophy, Western University
PhilPeople is currently in Beta Sponsored by the PhilPapers Foundation and the American Philosophical Association
Feedback