Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2007;335 (3 November), doi:10.1136/bmj.39385.488796.47
Tony Delamothe, deputy editor
tdelamothe@bmj.com
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
A lot can go wrong between conception and that last, failed attempt at cardiopulmonary massage, but it's the two extremes of life that seem most fraught. To my knowledge, no cardinals or archbishops have opined on Lyme disease (doi: 10.1136/bmj.39363.530961.AD) or sepsis (doi: 10.1136/bmj.39346.696620.AE), but they've had a lot to say on abortion and end of life decisions.
Never out of the news and courts in the United States (doi: 10.1136/bmj.39384.487326.4E), abortion is firmly back on the political agenda in the United Kingdom. As Jonathan Gornall pointed out earlier this year, the core aim of anti-abortionists is the complete abolition of abortion, except where it's a matter of life or death for the mother (BMJ 2007;334:285). Given the impossibility of repealing abortion laws in developed countries, their focus has moved to chip-chipping away at the upper legal time limit for abortions. In the UK, they've proposed
![]()
CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
Technorati What's this?
What can you learn from this BMJ paper? Read Leanne Tite's Paper+