Calls for Papers
Current Calls for Special Issues:
- Vol. 10, No. 2: Health and Ecological Destruction: Fracking and Beyond
Submissions due January 1, 2016.
- Vol. 10, No. 1: 10th Anniversary Issue
Submissions due October 1, 2015.
- Vol 9, No. 2: See How She Runs: Feminists Rethink Fitness
EXTENDED SUBMISSION DATE: June 1, 2015.
Open Call for Papers:IJFAB provides a forum within bioethics for feminist thought and debate. IJFAB welcomes feminist scholarship on ethical issues related to health, health care and the biomedical sciences, public health, the social, cultural, and environmental determinants of health, and global ethics. IJFAB aims to demonstrate clearly the necessity and distinctive contributions of feminist scholarship to bioethics.
IJFAB publishes at least one open issue per year in addition to thematically framed special issues. Please submit your manuscript in any of the categories listed below, and the Editorial Office will see that it is reviewed either for IJFAB's next open issue or for an appropriate special issue of IJFAB.
- Articles are usually in the range of 8,000–10,000 words (roughly 32–40 manuscript pages). Shorter articles are also welcome.
- Conversations provide a forum for public dialogue on particular issues in bioethics. Scholars engaged in fruitful exchanges are encouraged to share those discussions here. Submissions for this section are usually 3,000–5,000 words.
- Commentaries offer an opportunity for short analyses (under 4,000 words) of specific policy issues, legislation, court decisions, or other contemporary developments within bioethics.
- Narratives often illuminate clinical practice or ethical thinking. IJFAB invites narratives that shed light on aspects of health, health care, or bioethics. Submissions for the section are usually in the range of 3,000–5,000 words.
All submissions are subject to triple anonymous peer review. The Editorial Office aims to return an initial decision to authors within eight weeks. Authors are frequently asked to revise and resubmit based on extensive reviewer comments. The Editorial Office aims to return a decision on revised papers within four-to-six weeks.
Manuscripts submitted to IJFAB should not be under simultaneous consideration by any other journal, nor should they have been published elsewhere. Please find additional instructions for submission here.
IJFAB also welcomes proposals for future special issues. Please contact the Editorial Office directly: EditorialOffice@IJFAB.org.
The deadline for submission for this issue is January 1, 2016. *please note new submission deadline*
Guest Editors: Laura Purdy and Wendy Lynne Lee
“Which questions moral philosophers choose to study—and choose not to study—is itself a moral issue,” wrote Virginia Warren in her groundbreaking 1979 article. Indeed, bioethics has often focused on important, but relatively narrow issues based on the assumption that health is a natural lottery and that the chief moral questions have to do with the quality of care, and fair access to it, or with the implications of new technologies to treat or cure, and questions about reproduction and death. Of course, some writing has always acknowledged many influences on health and thus longevity, encouraged, no doubt, by scholarship in epidemiology, the social determinants of health, interest in food/agriculture issues, and concern about occupational and environmental pollution.
This special issue of IJFAB aims to examine, through a feminist lens, human activities such as fracking, that, by negatively impacting the environment, threaten health.
Science fiction, such as Cormac McCarthy’s The Road, abounds with post-apocalyptic nightmares, but rarely devotes any attention to how they came about or whether they could have been prevented.
Yet, as ever more paths to environmental disaster are opened up by corporate and governmental decisions, the preventable is being touted as inevitable, natural, and good.
Many of us now live in disbelief at the deliberate dismantling of the conditions required for human (and nonhuman) flourishing by people apparently oblivious or disdainful of the consequences. If these forces continue to prevail, it is only a matter of time before the consequences of widespread lack of access to clean water, air and land pollution, desertification, and deforestation, will drastically reduce human life spans, and quite possibly lead to human extinction. The process will exacerbate the fight for survival at all levels, from the individual to the national.
We encourage readers to think about the many ways human activities are putting at risk human health, shortening lives, and risking species suicide.
Our main goal is to evaluate the health consequences of activities intended to maintain and expand dependence on fossil fuels, and technology in general, especially that held to be necessary for sustaining rapidly growing populations, no matter at what cost to the environment. These goals, in turn, reflect the needs and interests of continued western hegemony. We encourage potential contributors to contact us for a more detailed description of possible topics. In addition, we hope for submissions on the many related topics not listed here, such as mountain top removal, tar sands development, or as yet unidentified threats.
The deadline for submission for this issue is October 1, 2015.IJFAB welcomes feminist scholarship from any discipline on ethical issues related to health, health care, and the biomedical sciences, or to the social, economic, and environmental determinants of health. For the 10th anniversary issue, essays that evaluate the role of feminism in shaping bioethics are particularly welcome. Submissions to this issue are limited to 5,000 words.
EXTENDED SUBMISSION DATE: June 1, 2015.
Guest Editors: Samantha Brennan and Tracy Isaacs
Fitness is a neglected concept in bioethics but fitness is of key importance to women’s health and well-being. Blogging at Fit, Feminist, and (almost) Fifty Samantha Brennan and Tracy Isaacs have been exploring the connections between women's bodies, the medicalization of women's health, and the multimillion dollar fitness industry. Until recently the focus of feminist criticism was on diet and weight loss, while ‘fitness’ was thought to be benign. More recently feminists have been engaging with the rhetoric of fitness as well. Some of the issues discussed show that there are significant impediments to women’s flourishing associated with fitness talk: fat shaming, body image, the tyranny of dieting, the narrow aesthetic ideal of femininity and how antithetical it is to athleticism, the sexualization of female athletes, women and competition, issues about entitlement, inclusion, and exclusion, the way expectations about achievement are gender variable, the harms of stereotyping. Feminists have begun to interrogate the very assumptions about what constitutes “fitness” in the first place. How is fitness connected to ableism and non-disabled privilege? Sport and fitness provide us with microcosms of more general feminist concerns about power, privilege, entitlement, and socialization.
Interested contributors are encouraged to submit papers on any topic related to feminism and fitness. Possible topics include:
- Is there a role for medical professionals to play in women's fitness?
- Do the norms of femininity and feminine socialization conflict with fitness
- Doctors often worry about the suitability of women’s bodies for exercise. How should feminists think about the role medical professionals played in making women’s effort to exercise a matter of serious health concern?
- Pregnant bodies have often been the source of medical policing when it comes to physical activity. Women are told to be sure to exercise, but not too much, and in this way, not in that way, for fear of damaging their unborn child’s health. What critical perspective does a feminist analysis of prenatal fitness bring to bear?
- What should we make of the coercive nature of health claims? Is ‘healthism’ something that ought to be of concern to feminists?
- How should we define fitness? Is a feminist account of fitness possible? What would a feminist account of fitness look like?
- How do we balance the benefits of fitness against the dangers inherent in sport?
- Is fitness an inherently ableist notion, making troubling assumptions and presumptions about disability, normality, normal function, and fitness?