Abramowicz, J.S. 2013. Benefits and risks of ultrasound in pregnancy. Seminars in Perinatology 37(5): 295–300.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Åhman, A., K. Edvardsson, T.A. Fagerli, et al. 2019. A much valued tool that also brings ethical dilemmas—a qualitative study of Norwegian midwives’ experiences and views on the role of obstetric ultrasound. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 19(1): 33.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Åhman, A., M. Persson, K. Edvardsson, et al. 2015. Two sides of the same coin—an interview study of Swedish obstetricians’ experiences using ultrasound in pregnancy management. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 15: 304.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Ahman, A., K. Runestam, and A. Sarkadi. 2010. Did I really want to know this? Pregnant women’s reaction to detection of a soft marker during ultrasound screening. Patient Education and Counseling 81(1): 87–93.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Alty, J., and E. Hoey. 2013. Practical ultrasound: An illustrated guide, 2nd ed. London: CRC Press.

Book  Google Scholar 

Aune, I., and A. Möller. 2012. “I want a choice, but I don’t want to decide” - A qualitative study of pregnant women’s experiences regarding early ultrasound risk assessment for chromosomal anomalies. Midwifery 28(1): 14–23.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Bashour, H., R. Hafez and A. Abdulsalam. 2005. Syrian women’s perceptions and experiences of ultrasound screening in pregnancy: implications for antenatal policy. Reproductive Health Matters 13(25): 147–154.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Beauchamp, T.L. and J.F. Childress. 2001. Principles of biomedical ethics, 8th ed. Oxford University Press.

Google Scholar 

Bijma, H.H., A. van der Heide and H.I.J. Wildschut. 2008. Decision-making after ultrasound diagnosis of fetal abnormality. Reproductive Health Matters 16 (sup31): 82–89.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Black, R. 1992. Seeing the baby: The impact of ultrasound technology. Journal of Genetic Counseling 1(1): 45–54.

Article  Google Scholar 

Boucher, J. 2004. Ultrasound: a window to the womb?: Obstetric ultrasound and the abortion rights debate. Journal of Medical Humanities 25(1): 7–19.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Brauer, S. 2016. Moral implications of obstetric technologies for pregnancy and motherhood. Medicine Health Care and Philosophy. 19(1): 45–54.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Burlbaw, J. 2004. Focusing on the issues: obstetric sonography -- that’s entertainment? Journal of Diagnostic Medical Sonography 20(6): 444–448.

Article  Google Scholar 

Burrow, S. 2012. Reproductive autonomy and reproductive technology. Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology 16(1): 31–44.

Google Scholar 

Charo, R.A. 2014. Physicians and the (woman’s) body politic. New England Journal of Medicine 370(3): 193–195.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Chasen, S.T., and D.W. Skupski. 2003. Ethical dimensions of nuchal translucency screening. Clinics in Perinatology 30(1): 95–102.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Chervenak, F.A., and L.B. McCullough. 1989. Ethics in obstetric ultrasound. Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine 8(9): 493–497.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Chervenak, F.A., and L.B. McCullough. 1991. Ethics, an emerging subdiscipline of obstetric ultrasound, and its relevance to the routine obstetric scan. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology 1(1): 18–20.

Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Chervenak, F.A., and L.B. McCullough. 1996. Should sex identification be offered as part of the routine ultrasound examination? Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology 8(5): 293–294.

Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Chervenak, F.A., and L.B. McCullough. 2005. An ethical critique of boutique fetal imaging: A case for the medicalization of fetal imaging. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 192(1): 31–33.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Chervenak, F.A., L.B. McCullough, and J.L. Chervenak. 1989. Prenatal informed consent for sonogram: an indication for obstetric ultrasonography. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 161(4): 857–860.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Coles, K. 2007. Recreational scans: harmless curiosity? RCM midwives: The official journal of the Royal College of Midwives 10(8): 370–371.

PubMed  Google Scholar 

Curado, J., and A. Bhide. 2018. The use of ultrasound in the antenatal diagnosis of structural abnormalities. Obstetrics, Gynaecology & Reproductive Medicine 28(10): 301–307.

Article  Google Scholar 

de Jong, A., W.J. Dondorp, S.G.M. Frints, C.E.M. de Die-Smulders and G.M.W.R. de Wert. 2011. Advances in prenatal screening: The ethical dimension. Nature Reviews Genetics 12(9): 657–663.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Donovan, S. 2006. Inescapable burden of choice? The impact of a culture of prenatal screening on women’s experiences of pregnancy. Health Sociology Review 15(4): 397–405.

Article  Google Scholar 

Dowdy, D. 2016. Keepsake ultrasound: Taking another look. Journal of Radiology Nursing 35(2): 119–132.

Article  Google Scholar 

Duden, B. 1993. Disembodying women: Perspectives on pregnancy and the unborn. Translated by L. Hoinacki. Harvard University Press.

Edvardsson, K., A. Åhman, T.A. Fagerli et al. 2018. Norwegian obstetricians’ experiences of the use of ultrasound in pregnancy management. A qualitative study. Sex & Reproductive Healthcare 15: 69–76.

Article  Google Scholar 

Edvardsson, K., A. Lalos, A. Åhman, R. Small, S. Graner and I. Mogren. 2016. Increasing possibilities—Increasing dilemmas: A qualitative study of Swedish midwives’ experiences of ultrasound use in pregnancy. Midwifery 42: 46–53.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Edvardsson, K., I. Mogren, A. Lalos, M. Persson, and R. Small. 2015a. A routine tool with far-reaching influence: Australian midwives’ views on the use of ultrasound during pregnancy. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 15: 195.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Edvardsson, K., R. Small, A. Lalos, M. Persson, and I. Mogren. 2015b. Ultrasound’s “window on the womb” brings ethical challenges for balancing maternal and fetal health interests: obstetricians’ experiences in Australia. BMC Medical Ethics 16(1): 31.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Edvardsson, K., R. Small, M. Persson, A. Lalos, and I. Mogren. 2014. “Ultrasound is an invaluable third eye, but it can’t see everything”: A qualitative study with obstetricians in Australia. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 14: 363.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Edwards, H., and N. Thomson. 2012. Social and practical implications of fetal sex determination using ultrasound. Ultrasound 20(1): 49–53.

Article  Google Scholar 

Favaretto, M., D.F. Vears, and P. Borry. 2020. On the epistemic status of prenatal ultrasound: Are ultrasound scans photographic pictures? Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 45(2): 231–250.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Favre, R., V. Guige, A.S. Weingertner, et al. 2009. Is the non-respect of ethical principles by health professionals during first-trimester sonographic Down syndrome screening damaging to patient autonomy? Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology 34(1): 25–32.

Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Frost, E.A., and A.M. Haas. 2017. Seeing and knowing the womb: A technofeminist reframing of fetal ultrasound toward a decolonization of our bodies. Computers and Composition 43(1): 88–105.

Article  Google Scholar 

Gammeltoft, T., and H.T. Nguyen. 2007. Fetal conditions and fatal decisions: Ethical dilemmas in ultrasound screening in Vietnam. Social Science & Medicine 64(11): 2248–2259.

Article  Google Scholar 

Getz, L., and A.L. Kirkengen. 2003. Ultrasound screening in pregnancy: Advancing technology, soft markers for fetal chromosomal aberrations, and unacknowledged ethical dilemmas. Social Science & Medicine 56(10): 2045–2057.

Article  Google Scholar 

Giebel, H.M. 2020. Ultrasound viewers’ attribution of moral status to fetal humans: A case for presumptive rationality. Diametros 17(64): 22–35.