The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Problem of Abortion and the Doctrine of the Double Effect
Abstract
Abortion is considered in relation to the doctrine of the double effect, which distinguishes between the intentions behind an action and consequences foreseen but not desired. This doctrine, often used to defend the position of the Catholic Church on abortion, is here rejected. Alternative distinctions are drawn, between what we do and what we allow to happen, and between the infringement of ‘positive’ and ‘negative’ duties. These distinctions are applied to the problem of abortion and to other moral dilemmas.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Cognitive load selectively interferes with utilitarian moral judgment
Greene, J. D., Morelli, S. A., Lowenberg, K., Nystrom, L. E., & Cohen, J. D. (2008) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2007.11.004 · Cited by 1,231
Rai, T. S., & Fiske, A. P. (2011) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/a0021867 · Cited by 887
Wolff, P., & Barbey, A. K. (2015) · Frontiers in Human Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2015.00001 · Cited by 788
Is It Good to Cooperate? Testing the Theory of Morality-as-Cooperation in 60 Societies
Curry, O. S., Mullins, D. A., & Whitehouse, H. (2019) · Current Anthropology · doi:10.1086/701478 · Cited by 734
Deontological and utilitarian inclinations in moral decision making: A process dissociation approach
Conway, P., & Gawronski, B. (2013) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0031021 · Cited by 696
Metadata
- Authors
- Foot, P.
- Venue
- Virtues and Vices
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press
- Published
- 2002-10-17
- Pages
- 19-32
- OpenAlex
- W1593687854
- Cited by
- 1,364
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 44.53
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Problem of Abortion and the Doctrine of the Double Effect. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/0199252866.003.0002
- The paper
- Foot, P. (2002). The Problem of Abortion and the Doctrine of the Double Effect. Virtues and Vices. https://doi.org/10.1093/0199252866.003.0002
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
