{"id":2302,"date":"2013-01-25T12:48:55","date_gmt":"2013-01-25T11:48:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/?p=2302"},"modified":"2013-01-26T10:13:59","modified_gmt":"2013-01-26T09:13:59","slug":"but-thats-not-what-it-says-is-it","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/2013\/01\/25\/but-thats-not-what-it-says-is-it\/","title":{"rendered":"But that’s not what it says, is it?"},"content":{"rendered":"

Today’s blast of righteous indignation is directed towards New Mexico. \u00a0House Bill 206<\/span><\/a><\/span><\/span> says, in essence, that… well, it’s short, so here it is in full:<\/p>\n

\n

HOUSE BILL 206<\/p>\n

51<\/b>ST LEGISLATURE <\/b>–\u00a0<\/b>STATE\u00a0<\/b>OF\u00a0<\/b>NEW\u00a0<\/b>MEXICO\u00a0<\/b>–<\/b> FIRST SESSION<\/b>,\u00a0<\/b>2013<\/b><\/p>\n

INTRODUCED BY<\/p>\n

Cathrynn N. Brown<\/p>\n

AN ACT<\/p>\n

RELATING TO CRIMINAL LAW; SPECIFYING PROCURING OF AN ABORTION\u00a0AS TAMPERING WITH EVIDENCE IN CASES OF CRIMINAL SEXUAL\u00a0PENETRATION OR INCEST.<\/p>\n

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO:<\/p>\n

SECTION 1.\u00a0 Section 30-22-5 NMSA 1978 (being Laws 1963, Chapter 303, Section 22-5, as amended) is amended to read:<\/p>\n

“30-22-5.\u00a0 TAMPERING WITH EVIDENCE.–<\/p>\n

A.\u00a0 Tampering with evidence consists of destroying,\u00a0changing, hiding, placing or fabricating any physical evidence\u00a0with intent to prevent the apprehension, prosecution or\u00a0conviction of any person or to throw suspicion of the\u00a0commission of a crime upon another.<\/p>\n

B.\u00a0 Tampering with evidence shall include procuring\u00a0or facilitating an abortion, or compelling or coercing another\u00a0to obtain an abortion, of a fetus that is the result of\u00a0criminal sexual penetration or incest with the intent to\u00a0destroy evidence of the crime.<\/p>\n

C.\u00a0 Whoever commits tampering with evidence\u00a0shall be punished as follows:<\/p>\n

(1)\u00a0 if the highest crime for which tampering\u00a0with evidence is committed is a capital or first degree felony\u00a0or a second degree felony, the person committing tampering with\u00a0evidence is guilty of a third degree felony;<\/p>\n

(2)\u00a0 if the highest crime for which tampering\u00a0with evidence is committed is a third degree felony or a fourth\u00a0degree felony, the person committing tampering with evidence is\u00a0guilty of a fourth degree felony;<\/p>\n

(3)\u00a0 if the highest crime for which tampering\u00a0with evidence is committed is a misdemeanor or a petty\u00a0misdemeanor, the person committing tampering with evidence is\u00a0guilty of a petty misdemeanor; and<\/p>\n

(4)\u00a0 if the highest crime for which tampering\u00a0with evidence is committed is indeterminate, the person\u00a0committing tampering with evidence is guilty of a fourth degree\u00a0felony.”<\/p>\n

SECTION 2.\u00a0 EFFECTIVE DATE.–The effective date of the\u00a0provisions of this act is July 1, 2013.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The new bit is section B.<\/p>\n

In a statement, the congresswoman who introduced the Bill, one Cathrynn Brown,\u00a0said that<\/span><\/a><\/span><\/span>\u00a0her intention was to punish the person who commits incest or rape and then procures or facilitates an abortion to destroy the evidence of the crime.<\/p>\n

Hmmm. \u00a0Except that that’s not what it says, is it<\/em>? \u00a0Maybe she should read the text of her own Bill. \u00a0It talks about procuring an abortion, as well as compelling or coercing another person to have one.<\/p>\n

I think that the second bit is actually fairly unobjectionable. \u00a0To compel someone to have a medical procedure, whomever that someone is, and whatever the procedure, is to wrong them; and if you compel them to have the procedure in order to remove evidence of another wrong, then the wrongness is multiplied. \u00a0But, y’know… that first bit… um…<\/p>\n

I mean, it might even be the case that witnesses and victims of a crime have certain responsibilities to participate in the criminal justice process, pro bono publico<\/em>. \u00a0It’d remain to be seen what those responsibilities are, and how they’d be enforceable, but it’s not a self-evidently nuts idea from the off. \u00a0You might even be able to couch that in terms of self-interest: it’s in the self-interest of individuals for there to be a functional justice process, and a functional justice process requires participation. \u00a0But even there, there’d have to be a reasonability constraint; there might be some things that were not demanded by any such responsibility.<\/p>\n

And, anyway: “tampering with evidence” implies a deliberate project of interference with the intention to disrupt the possibility of a prosecution. \u00a0That’s different from “acting in such a way as to make prosecution trickier”. \u00a0That much is made clear by section A of the Bill itself:<\/p>\n

Tampering with evidence consists of destroying,\u00a0changing, hiding, placing or fabricating any physical evidence\u00a0with intent to prevent the apprehension, prosecution or\u00a0conviction of any person or to throw suspicion of the\u00a0commission of a crime upon another<\/strong>. [emphasis mine]<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

This explains why it’d be illegitimate to try to prosecute someone whose first reaction on discovering that they’ve been burgled is to clean up the broken glass. \u00a0For sure, the prosecutors might’ve thanked you for not doing so, but… well, that’s just the way it goes.<\/p>\n

Section A would easily cover attempts to compel a raped woman to have an abortion as a means of hiding evidence of that rape. \u00a0But what’s notable about the Brown Bill, though, is that, in the light of this clause, the second must – strictly speaking – apply only to women who seek abortions with the intention of preventing the apprehension of the person who raped them<\/em>. \u00a0And that’s\u00a0weird<\/em>.<\/p>\n

Weird for a few reasons. \u00a0One: the number of women that desperate to protect their rapist is likely to be small. \u00a0This is the weakest reason, because there could be women who don’t want to see a prosecution out of fear of reprisal. \u00a0On the other hand, who would have reported the rape in the first place? \u00a0Is it credible that a woman should report a rape, and then have an abortion in order to protect the person she’d accused? \u00a0If she were facing intimidation, she’d be much more likely just to drop the claim, wouldn’t she? \u00a0Finally, if – just for the sake of the argument – a woman were coerced into having an abortion in order to hide evidence of a rape, but was not coerced into dropping the charges entirely… well, wouldn’t the Brown Bill amount to a demand that she be prosecuted for giving in to coercion? \u00a0That’s deeply odd.<\/p>\n

Two: pregnancy isn’t evidence of rape anyway – just of sex; so ending a pregnancy will have only a minimal impact on demonstrating that the sex was rape on this occasion. \u00a0Not everyone gets pregnant from rape, but that makes no difference to the credibility of the claim that it happened; why, then, should no-longer-being-pregnant make a difference to whether or not a rape claim is credible?<\/p>\n

Three: as Pat Davis says in the\u00a0HuffPo<\/em> article,\u00a0\u201cThe bill turns victims of rape and incest into felons and forces them to become incubators of evidence for the state.”<\/p>\n

The bleaker parts of my mind, I have to admit, have a grudging respect for the pro-life loonies of the GOP, in a Thomas Crown Affair<\/em> kind of a way. \u00a0You don’t have to endorse theft to watch that film and think, “Yep: if I were an art thief, I’d aspire to that. \u00a0Bravo!”, and then go back to the business of\u00a0not<\/em> being an art-thief, and being generally anti-theft. \u00a0Same here. \u00a0I mean, look at the intellectual gymnastics that they have to perform given that they’re anti-abortion, but\u00a0Roe v Wade<\/em> is still valid law (forty years this week!), and so they have to work within its constraints. \u00a0Whether it be requiring paternal consent, or ultrasounds, or whatever else… well, there’s a real creativity involved in making it so bloody hard to get what the Supreme Court ruled to be an entitlement, and in making the lives of women who want to end their pregnancy that bit harder, and that bit more miserable.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Today’s blast of righteous indignation is directed towards New Mexico. \u00a0House Bill 206 says, in essence, that… well, it’s short, so here it is in full: HOUSE BILL 206 51ST LEGISLATURE –\u00a0STATE\u00a0OF\u00a0NEW\u00a0MEXICO\u00a0– FIRST SESSION,\u00a02013 INTRODUCED BY Cathrynn N. Brown AN ACT RELATING TO CRIMINAL LAW; SPECIFYING PROCURING OF AN ABORTION\u00a0AS TAMPERING WITH EVIDENCE IN CASES […]<\/p>\n

Read More…<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[511,2148,591,475,403,2022,407],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2302","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-in-the-news","category-law","category-life-and-death","category-politics","category-rant","category-reproduction","category-wtf"],"yoast_head":"\nBut that's not what it says, is it? - Journal of Medical Ethics blog<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/2013\/01\/25\/but-thats-not-what-it-says-is-it\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"But that's not what it says, is it? - Journal of Medical Ethics blog\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Today’s blast of righteous indignation is directed towards New Mexico. \u00a0House Bill 206 says, in essence, that… well, it’s short, so here it is in full: HOUSE BILL 206 51ST LEGISLATURE –\u00a0STATE\u00a0OF\u00a0NEW\u00a0MEXICO\u00a0– FIRST SESSION,\u00a02013 INTRODUCED BY Cathrynn N. Brown AN ACT RELATING TO CRIMINAL LAW; SPECIFYING PROCURING OF AN ABORTION\u00a0AS TAMPERING WITH EVIDENCE IN CASES [...]Read More...\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/2013\/01\/25\/but-thats-not-what-it-says-is-it\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Journal of Medical Ethics blog\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2013-01-25T11:48:55+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2013-01-26T09:13:59+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"BMJ\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"BMJ\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/medical-ethics\\\/2013\\\/01\\\/25\\\/but-thats-not-what-it-says-is-it\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/medical-ethics\\\/2013\\\/01\\\/25\\\/but-thats-not-what-it-says-is-it\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"BMJ\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/medical-ethics\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/ba3da426ed20e8f1d933ca367d8216fe\"},\"headline\":\"But that’s not what it says, is it?\",\"datePublished\":\"2013-01-25T11:48:55+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2013-01-26T09:13:59+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/medical-ethics\\\/2013\\\/01\\\/25\\\/but-thats-not-what-it-says-is-it\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":1234,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/medical-ethics\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"In the News\",\"Law\",\"Life and Death\",\"Politics\",\"Rant\",\"Reproduction\",\"WTF?\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/medical-ethics\\\/2013\\\/01\\\/25\\\/but-thats-not-what-it-says-is-it\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/medical-ethics\\\/2013\\\/01\\\/25\\\/but-thats-not-what-it-says-is-it\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/medical-ethics\\\/2013\\\/01\\\/25\\\/but-thats-not-what-it-says-is-it\\\/\",\"name\":\"But that's not what it says, is it? - Journal of Medical Ethics blog\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/medical-ethics\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2013-01-25T11:48:55+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2013-01-26T09:13:59+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/medical-ethics\\\/2013\\\/01\\\/25\\\/but-thats-not-what-it-says-is-it\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/medical-ethics\\\/2013\\\/01\\\/25\\\/but-thats-not-what-it-says-is-it\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/medical-ethics\\\/2013\\\/01\\\/25\\\/but-thats-not-what-it-says-is-it\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/medical-ethics\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"But that’s not what it says, is it?\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/medical-ethics\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/medical-ethics\\\/\",\"name\":\"Journal of Medical Ethics blog\",\"description\":\"A blog to discuss the ethics of medicine in its many guises and formats.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/medical-ethics\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/medical-ethics\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/medical-ethics\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Journal of Medical Ethics blog\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/medical-ethics\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/medical-ethics\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/medical-ethics\\\/files\\\/2026\\\/04\\\/jme-logo.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/medical-ethics\\\/files\\\/2026\\\/04\\\/jme-logo.png\",\"width\":200,\"height\":50,\"caption\":\"Journal of Medical Ethics blog\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/medical-ethics\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"}},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/medical-ethics\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/ba3da426ed20e8f1d933ca367d8216fe\",\"name\":\"BMJ\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/b4d8f39281bcae118348a1c027347b8e53b82d42520e774a8b50dd9a6ac6c01d?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/b4d8f39281bcae118348a1c027347b8e53b82d42520e774a8b50dd9a6ac6c01d?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/b4d8f39281bcae118348a1c027347b8e53b82d42520e774a8b50dd9a6ac6c01d?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"BMJ\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/medical-ethics\\\/author\\\/admin\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"But that's not what it says, is it? - Journal of Medical Ethics blog","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/2013\/01\/25\/but-thats-not-what-it-says-is-it\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"But that's not what it says, is it? - Journal of Medical Ethics blog","og_description":"Today’s blast of righteous indignation is directed towards New Mexico. \u00a0House Bill 206 says, in essence, that… well, it’s short, so here it is in full: HOUSE BILL 206 51ST LEGISLATURE –\u00a0STATE\u00a0OF\u00a0NEW\u00a0MEXICO\u00a0– FIRST SESSION,\u00a02013 INTRODUCED BY Cathrynn N. Brown AN ACT RELATING TO CRIMINAL LAW; SPECIFYING PROCURING OF AN ABORTION\u00a0AS TAMPERING WITH EVIDENCE IN CASES [...]Read More...","og_url":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/2013\/01\/25\/but-thats-not-what-it-says-is-it\/","og_site_name":"Journal of Medical Ethics blog","article_published_time":"2013-01-25T11:48:55+00:00","article_modified_time":"2013-01-26T09:13:59+00:00","author":"BMJ","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"BMJ","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/2013\/01\/25\/but-thats-not-what-it-says-is-it\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/2013\/01\/25\/but-thats-not-what-it-says-is-it\/"},"author":{"name":"BMJ","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/#\/schema\/person\/ba3da426ed20e8f1d933ca367d8216fe"},"headline":"But that’s not what it says, is it?","datePublished":"2013-01-25T11:48:55+00:00","dateModified":"2013-01-26T09:13:59+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/2013\/01\/25\/but-thats-not-what-it-says-is-it\/"},"wordCount":1234,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/#organization"},"articleSection":["In the News","Law","Life and Death","Politics","Rant","Reproduction","WTF?"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/2013\/01\/25\/but-thats-not-what-it-says-is-it\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/2013\/01\/25\/but-thats-not-what-it-says-is-it\/","url":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/2013\/01\/25\/but-thats-not-what-it-says-is-it\/","name":"But that's not what it says, is it? - Journal of Medical Ethics blog","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/#website"},"datePublished":"2013-01-25T11:48:55+00:00","dateModified":"2013-01-26T09:13:59+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/2013\/01\/25\/but-thats-not-what-it-says-is-it\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/2013\/01\/25\/but-thats-not-what-it-says-is-it\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/2013\/01\/25\/but-thats-not-what-it-says-is-it\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"But that’s not what it says, is it?"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/#website","url":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/","name":"Journal of Medical Ethics blog","description":"A blog to discuss the ethics of medicine in its many guises and formats.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/#organization","name":"Journal of Medical Ethics blog","url":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/files\/2026\/04\/jme-logo.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/files\/2026\/04\/jme-logo.png","width":200,"height":50,"caption":"Journal of Medical Ethics blog"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/#\/schema\/person\/ba3da426ed20e8f1d933ca367d8216fe","name":"BMJ","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b4d8f39281bcae118348a1c027347b8e53b82d42520e774a8b50dd9a6ac6c01d?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b4d8f39281bcae118348a1c027347b8e53b82d42520e774a8b50dd9a6ac6c01d?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b4d8f39281bcae118348a1c027347b8e53b82d42520e774a8b50dd9a6ac6c01d?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"BMJ"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/"],"url":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/author\/admin\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2302","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2302"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2302\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2302"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2302"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2302"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}