17. Baylis, F. (2009, August 12). Aid by vaccine. The Mark News.http://pioneers.themarknews.com/articles/420-aid-by-vaccine/#.UjM67qONSUk18. Baylis, F. (2009, August 6). How much vaccine to order and who gets it? Globe and Mail.http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/how-much-vaccine-to-order-and-who-getsit/article1242268/19. Baylis, F. (2009, July 3). Making babies one at a time. The Mark News.http://pioneers.themarknews.com/articles/341-making-babies-one-at-a-time/#.UjM7B6ONSUk20. Baylis, F. (2009, May 5) Why girls shouldn’t be guinea pigs. The Mark News.http://pioneers.themarknews.com/articles/118-why-girls-shouldnt-be-guinea-pigs/#.UjM7HKONSUk21. Baylis, F. (2009, May 4). Baby-making technologies: Fertile field for federal or provincial oversight?Globe and Mail.22. Baylis, F., McLeod, C., Nisker, J., & Sherwin, S. (2007, January 16). Nothing extreme aboutprotecting fresh embryos. Globe and Mail, p. A15.23. Robert, J. S., & Baylis, F. (2005, July 4). When it comes to funding research, value should count.Globe and Mail, p. A13.24. Baylis, F., & Downie, J. (2003, February 3). Cloning for stem cell research unnecessary anddangerous. The Hill Times, p. 16. Reprinted in: (2003, February). CellLines, 2, 3-4; (2003, March);and The Bulletin, The Genetics Society of Canada, 34(1), 21-23.25. Baylis, F., & Downie, J. (2002, July 3). Ban cloning. Do you copy? Globe and Mail, p. A13.26. Baylis, F. (2002, May 6). Parliament's call for moratorium on stem cell research perplexing. The HillTimes, p. 30.27. Baylis, F. (2002, March 2). Our ethics are embryonic. Globe and Mail, p. A17.28. Baylis, F., & Kyle T (1989, December 19). Weighing the consequences of breaching confidentiality.The Medical Post, p. 8.29. Baylis, F., & Downie, J. (1989, November 25). Ensuring freedom to say no. London Free Press, p.A13.30. Baylis, F., & Downie, J. (1989, November 23). Avoid undue pressure to donate organs. The Gazette,p. B4.BOOK/ARTICLE REVIEWS1. Baylis, F. (1999). Effect of exposure to 15% oxygen on breathing patterns and oxygen saturation ininfants: Interventional study. In A. A. Fanaroff, M. J. Maisels, & D. K. Stevenson (Eds.), Year Book ofNeonatal and Perinatal Medicine (pp. 242-244). Chicago: Mosby.2. Baylis, F. (1999). Decision-making in the critically ill neonate: Cultural background v. individual lifeexperience. In A. A. Fanaroff, M. J. Maisels, & D. K. Stevenson (Eds.), Year Book of Neonatal andPerinatal Medicine (pp. 353-355). Chicago: Mosby.3. Baylis, F. (1999). Analysis of clinical bioethics teaching in pediatric surgery residency. In A. A.Fanaroff & M. J. S. D. K. Maisels (Eds.), Year Book of Neonatal and Perinatal Medicine (pp. 355-356). Chicago: Mosby.4. Baylis, F., & Bolton, M. (1998, December 20). [Review of book What Remains to Be Discovered:Mapping the Secrets of the Universe, the Origins of Life and the Future of the Human Race]. CBC,Quirks and Quarks.5. Baylis, F. (1998). Resource allocation in neonatal and medical ICUs: Epidemiology and rationing atthe extremes of life. In A. A. Fanaroff, M. J. Maisels, & D. K. Stevenson (Eds.), Year Book of Neonataland Perinatal Medicine (pp. 395-398). Chicago: Mosby.Françoise Baylis, Page 22
6. Baylis, F. (1998). Is venepuncture in neonatal research ethical? In A. A. Fanaroff, M. J. Maisels, & D.K. Stevenson (Eds.), Year Book of Neonatal and Perinatal Medicine (pp. 402-404). Chicago: Mosby.7. Baylis, F. (1998). Determinants of parental authorization for involvement of newborn infants in clinicaltrials. In A. A. Fanaroff, M. J. Maisels, & D. K. Stevenson (Eds.), Year Book of Neonatal and PerinatalMedicine (pp. 404-406). Chicago: Mosby.8. Baylis, F. (1997). Resolving the clinical and ethical dilemma involved in fetal-maternal conflicts. In A.A. Fanaroff, M. J. Maisels, & D. K. Stevenson (Eds.), Year Book of Neonatal and Perinatal Medicine(pp. 442-445). Chicago: Mosby.9. Baylis, F. (1995). An egalitarian ethic: Balancing rights and responsibilities [Review of the bookWomen and Children in Health Care: An Unequal Majority]. Medical Humanities Review, 9, 48-51.10. Baylis, F. (1993). Should children have the same rights as adults? [Review of the book In Their BestInterest: The Case Against Equal Rights for Children]. Medical Humanities Review, 7, 68-72.PRESENTATIONSREFEREED PRESENTATIONS (INTERNATIONAL) Research Involving Pregnant Women. 2012 ASBH Annual Meeting, Washington DC., U.S.A. 18October 2012. Ethically Sound Research Involving Pregnant Women. Panel: Fair Inclusion of Pregnant Women inResearch. 11 th International Congress of Bioethics, Netherlands, 27 June 2012 (with A. Ballantyne,R. Macklin and R. Faden). Do Donors and Non-Donors Have Different Moral values? Panel: Ethical Challenges in the Uses ofHuman Reproductive Tissue in Scientific Research Procurement and Protection? 11 th InternationalCongress of Bioethics, Netherlands, 27 June 2012 (with E. Haimes, S. De Lacey and C. Walby). Ethically Sound Research Involving Pregnant Women. Panel: A Just Research Agenda for PregnantWomen Supporting Appropriate Health Care Now and in the Future. 9 th International Conference onFeminist Approaches to Bioethics, Netherlands, 26 June 2012 (with A. Ballantyne and R. Macklin). Personal Identity: The Promise and Threat of Deep Brain Stimulation. Australasian Association ofBioethics and Health Law, Brisbane, Australia, 8 July 2011. A Relational Account of Personal Identity. Australasian Association of Philosophy, Dunedin, NewZealand, 4 July 2011. The Impact of Relational Identity for the Ethical Evaluation of Brain-Machine Interfaces. Panel:Bonding Brain to Machines: Ethical Issues of Brain-Machine Interfaces. 10 th International Congressof Bioethics, Singapore, 28 July 2010 (with J. Clausen, G. Wolbring, B. Gordjin) Patients Beyond Borders: Shopping for Fertility Treatment. Panel: You’ve Come a Long Way, Baby:Ethical Considerations in Cross-Border Reproductive Travel. 8 th International Conference on FeministApproaches to Bioethics, Singapore, 26 July 2010 (with G. Crozier, D. Martin). <strong>Ethics</strong> and Neuroscience Research in Developing Countries. 38 th Annual Meeting of the Society forNeuroscience. Social Issues Roundtable: Global Neuroscience – Neuroethics and the Burden ofNervous System Disorders, Washington, DC, November 2008. Slippery Slopes and Cytoplasmic Hybrid Embryo Research. 10 th Annual Meeting of the AmericanSociety for Bioethics and Humanities, Cleveland, OH, October, 2008. Plenty Cheap: Animal Eggs for Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research. 9 th International Congress ofBioethics, Rijeka, Croatia, September 2008. Feminist Relational Theory: An Essential Component of Pandemic Planning. 7 th InternationalConference on Feminist Approaches to Bioethics and 9 th International Congress of Bioethics, Rijeka,Croatia, September 2008 (with N. Kenny and S. Sherwin). Using Nonhuman Animal Oocytes to Improve Assisted Human Reproduction: A Woman’s Choice? 7 thInternational Conference on Feminist Approaches to Bioethics, Rijeka, Croatia, September 2008. Defining Values for Bioethics and Bioethicists: Continuing the Dialogue. Panel. 9 th Annual Meeting ofthe American Society for Bioethics and Humanities, Washington DC, October, 2007 (with L.Eckenwiler, V. Ashby Sharpe, L. Turner, and F. Cohn).Françoise Baylis, Page 23
- Page 3 and 4: Dog Judge: Mrs Rosemary KiddCLASSIF
- Page 5: 2009-20102009-20102009-20102007-200
- Page 10 and 11: 10. Baylis, F., Ireland, A., Kaufma
- Page 12 and 13: 26. Baylis, F. & Fenton, A. (2007).
- Page 14 and 15: 62. Baylis, F. (1997). Errors in me
- Page 16 and 17: 21. Baylis, F., & Hellman, J. (2001
- Page 18 and 19: 13. Fenton, A. Meynell, L. & Baylis
- Page 20 and 21: esearch: in response. [Letter to th
- Page 24 and 25: Neuroenhancement: Psychopharmacolog
- Page 26 and 27: Promises and Perils of Embryonic St
- Page 28 and 29: Ethics and AHR in Canada: Current S
- Page 30 and 31: Research/Canadian Journal of Women
- Page 32 and 33: Choosing “For”, “With” or
- Page 34 and 35: Baylis F. Ethical Implications of G
- Page 36 and 37: Journal of Ethics in Mental Health,
- Page 38 and 39: In addition to the above, while wor