↓ Skip to main content

Mars ain’t the kind of place to raise your kid: ethical implications of pregnancy on missions to colonize other planets

Overview of attention for article published in Life Sciences, Society and Policy, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#11 of 109)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
twitter
11 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages
reddit
3 Redditors

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Mars ain’t the kind of place to raise your kid: ethical implications of pregnancy on missions to colonize other planets
Published in
Life Sciences, Society and Policy, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40504-016-0043-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Haley Schuster, Steven L. Peck

Abstract

The colonization of a new planet will inevitably bring about new bioethical issues. One is the possibility of pregnancy during the mission. During the journey to the target planet or moon, and for the first couple of years before a colony has been established and the colony has been accommodated for children, a pregnancy would jeopardize the safety of the crew and the wellbeing of the child. The principal concern with a pregnancy during an interplanetary mission is that it could put the entire crew in danger. Resources such as air, food, and medical supplies will be limited and calculated to keep the crew members alive. We explore the bioethical concerns of near-future space travel.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 4%
Unknown 24 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 24%
Student > Master 3 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 10 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 8%
Engineering 2 8%
Social Sciences 1 4%
Other 3 12%
Unknown 11 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 37. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 November 2023.
All research outputs
#1,059,391
of 25,055,009 outputs
Outputs from Life Sciences, Society and Policy
#11
of 109 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,546
of 348,419 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Life Sciences, Society and Policy
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,055,009 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 109 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 348,419 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them