Titlebook: Mental Retardation and Sterilization; A Problem of Compete Ruth Macklin,Willard Gaylin Book 1981 Springer Science+Business Media New York 1

otitis-externa

書目名稱Mental Retardation and Sterilization影響因子(影響力)




書目名稱Mental Retardation and Sterilization影響因子(影響力)學(xué)科排名




書目名稱Mental Retardation and Sterilization網(wǎng)絡(luò)公開度




書目名稱Mental Retardation and Sterilization網(wǎng)絡(luò)公開度學(xué)科排名




書目名稱Mental Retardation and Sterilization被引頻次




書目名稱Mental Retardation and Sterilization被引頻次學(xué)科排名




書目名稱Mental Retardation and Sterilization年度引用




書目名稱Mental Retardation and Sterilization年度引用學(xué)科排名




書目名稱Mental Retardation and Sterilization讀者反饋




書目名稱Mental Retardation and Sterilization讀者反饋學(xué)科排名

alleviate

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-3923-6care; ethical issues; ethics; research; treatment

描述

Toward a Definition of Mental Retardationhin a particular culture.. But whether retarded individuals were ignored, ridiculed, incarcerated, cast out, or looked upon with beneficence, attempts to comprehend and define the phenomena of retardation were few and far between until fairly recent times.

BRAVE

Voluntary Sterilization A Viable Alternative?ciding to be sterilized, the individual must make that decision freely if it is to be considered voluntary. But since sterilization is something that is ., the individual must not only freely decide that he or she wishes it to be done, but also, in legal terms, give his or her . that it be done.

幾何學(xué)家

Distinguishing Mentally Retarded Persons from Nonretardede aggregate they can be counted as deficits. These deficits make mildly retarded persons far more likely than nonretarded persons to be subject to exploitation, to be denied needed services, and to make errors of judgment that will have adverse consequences for themselves and others.

thalamus

Voluntary and Involuntary Sterilizationeugenic-sterilization statute in 1907. However, the practice did not become widespread until the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of such statutes in 1927. The Court held that a Virginia statute did not violate the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. In Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes’s often-quoted words:

口音在加重

maladorit

精致

石墨