Order:
  1.  38
    Sport-related concussion research agenda beyond medical science: culture, ethics, science, policy.Mike McNamee, Lynley C. Anderson, Pascal Borry, Silvia Camporesi, Wayne Derman, Soren Holm, Taryn Rebecca Knox, Bert Leuridan, Sigmund Loland, Francisco Javier Lopez Frias, Ludovica Lorusso, Dominic Malcolm, David McArdle, Brad Partridge, Thomas Schramme & Mike Weed - 2024 - Journal of Medical Ethics 51 (1):68-76.
    The Concussion in Sport Group guidelines have successfully brought the attention of brain injuries to the global medical and sport research communities, and has significantly impacted brain injury-related practices and rules of international sport. Despite being the global repository of state-of-the-art science, diagnostic tools and guides to clinical practice, the ensuing consensus statements remain the object of ethical and sociocultural criticism. The purpose of this paper is to bring to bear a broad range of multidisciplinary challenges to the processes and (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  2.  36
    On Loland’s conception of fair equality of opportunity in sport.Lynley C. Anderson & Taryn Rebecca Knox - 2020 - Journal of Medical Ethics 46 (9):595-596.
    In his latest paper, Loland1 tackles the question of whether athletes with differences of sexual development may compete in the women’s division. The topic is one of the most complex in sport and, as such, is fraught with debate. On one hand, the higher testosterone levels of athletes with DSD means they have an unfair performance advantage over their female competitors. On the other hand, it is argued that women with DSD should be able to compete in the gender division (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  3.  7
    Pregnant women are often not listened to, but pathologising pregnancy isn’t the solution.Brad Partridge & Taryn Rebecca Knox - 2024 - Journal of Medical Ethics 51 (1):50-51.
    Smajdor and Rasanen (2024) argue that pregnant women are routinely denied appropriate treatment because pregnancy is seen as normal, and so they are denied ‘patient status’. They claim that formally classifying pregnancy as a disease may lead to better treatment for pregnant women. In this response, we argue that pathologising pregnancy and classifying all pregnant women as ‘diseased patients’ won’t reconfigure care in ways that benefit all women. Rather, it will likely only embolden the view that clinicians are entitled to (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark