Reproductive Ethics

Recent decades have seen the facilitation of unconventional or even extraordinary reproductive endeavours. Sperm has been harvested from dying or deceased men at the request of their wives; reproductive tissue has been surgically removed from children at the request of their parents; deceased adults’ frozen embryos have been claimed by their parents, in order to create grandchildren; wombs have been transplanted from mothers to their daughters. What is needed for requests to be honoured by healthcare staff is that they align (...) with widely shared expectations about what people’s reproductive potential ought to be, what marital relationships ought to result in, and which kinds of ties are desirable between parents and children. Costly and invasive technologies are not considered excessive when they are used to support the building of appropriate families. However, deviations from dominant reproductive norms, even if technologically simple and convenient to the participants, are unlikely to receive support. In this paper, we offer examples of such deviations and explore their implications. If reproduction is important as a way of creating genetic relationships, should reproductive material in storage be offered to genetic relatives other than the people from whom it originated? And if parents are allowed to have reproductive material collected from their offspring, or even to use it to create babies, should offspring likewise be allowed to use their parents’ reproductive material? We tackle these questions and suggest ways in which interests in genetic ties could be operationalised in a more coherent and less-invasive manner than they currently are. (shrink)

本书以人类辅助生殖法律制度为研究对象,对这一制度在不同国家,我国不同法域的产生,发展及未来方向作了全面分析,以比较分析的视角,从中总结出可为我国借鉴吸收的优秀成果,对于未来法制发展方向与具体制度的建构 提出了可行化的学者建议.

I defend a novel account of the wrong of subjecting people to non-consensual sterilization (NCS), particularly in the context of the state-sponsored eugenics programmes once prevalent in the United States. What makes the eugenic practice of NCS distinctively wrong, I claim, is its dehumanizing core: the fact that it is tantamount to treating people as nonhuman animals, thereby expressing the degrading social meaning that they have the value of animals. The practice of NCS is prima facie seriously wrong partly, but (...) crucially, on these grounds. I consider and reject accounts of the wrong of NCS that make no reference to its animalizing character, such as that it violates victims’ (procreative) autonomy, amounts to treating them merely as a means, inflicts psychological harm on them, or constitutes an affront to their human dignity. My discussion suggests that the critical vocabulary of bioethics should be expanded beyond talk of rights-violations, benefits and harms, and equal treatment—and that the language of dehumanization is indispensable to bioethicists. (shrink)

In this paper, we identify some key features of what makes something a disease, and consider whether these apply to pregnancy. We argue that there are some compelling grounds for regarding pregnancy as a disease. Like a disease, pregnancy affects the health of the pregnant person, causing a range of symptoms from discomfort to death. Like a disease, pregnancy can be treated medically. Like a disease, pregnancy is caused by a pathogen, an external organism invading the host’s body. Like a (...) disease, the risk of getting pregnant can be reduced by using prophylactic measures. We address the question of whether the ‘normality’ of pregnancy, its current necessity for human survival, or the value often attached to it are reasons to reject the view that pregnancy is a disease. We point out that applying theories of disease to the case of pregnancy, can in many cases illuminate inconsistencies and problems within these theories. Finally, we show that it is difficult to find one theory of disease that captures all paradigm cases of diseases, while convincingly excluding pregnancy. We conclude that there are both normative and pragmatic reasons to consider pregnancy a disease. (shrink)

Is it wrong to create a blind child, for example by in vitro fertilization, if you could create a sighted child instead? Intuitively many people believe it is wrong, but this belief is difficult to justify. When there is a possibility to create and select either ‘blind’ or ‘sighted’ embryos choosing a set of ‘blind’ embryos seems to harm no-one since choosing ‘sighted’ embryos would create a different child altogether. So when the parents choose ‘blind’ embryos, they give some specific (...) individual a life that is the only option for her. Because her life is worth living (as blind peoples’ lives are), the parents have not wronged the child by creating her. This is the reasoning behind the famous non-identity problem. I suggest that the non-identity problem is based on a misunderstanding. I claim that when choosing a ‘blind’ embryo, prospective parents harm ‘their child’, whoever she or he will be. Put another way: parents harm their child in the de dicto sense and that is morally wrong. (shrink)

Introduction: Sexual harassment involves an assortment of coercive behaviors, including physical force, intimidation, and various forms of compulsion, including verbal harassment and forced penetration [1]. Sexual abuse can happen to both men and women. In the United Kingdom(UK), the problem of child sexual abuse (CSA) has epidemic proportions and is a global public health issue [2]. 53,874 incidents were reported under the 2012 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act as of 2021 [3]. to their ignorance about puberty, sexuality, and (...) fundamental human biological changes, adolescents have a very difficult time addressing their SRH demands. These underlying causes contribute to high rates of teen pregnancy, STIs, sexual assault, poor negotiating skills, forced marriage, and high fertility rates [4]. -/- Methods: The study used a quantitative technique and a descriptive cross-sectional design. Students at Jahangir Nagar University and the American International University of Bangladesh were the intended target group. Jahangir Nagar University and American International University of Bangladesh served as the study locations. The six-month trial period ran from January 2022 through June 2022. For this investigation, primary sources of data were used. The study unit was the individual student. Non-probability (purposive) sampling techniques were used for the investigation. -/- Results: The majority of survey participants (N=81) 62.2% were aged between 19 and 21 years old, and there was a statistically significant difference in age between students at public and private universities. None of our study participants suffered from any kind of sexual abuse, though they mentioned hearing about it. Regarding the view of sexual abuse, public universities 23% of those polled claimed sexual abuse as a justification for sharing inappropriate photos. At private universities, the response rate for crude jokes is 32.5%. Only the least number of public (2%) and private university (10%) students took part in sexual abuse-related awareness or training programs. Regarding the rights to receive training for prevention and safeguarding from sexual abuse, only 28% of the public and 40% of the private university students replied in affirmative. -/- Conclusion: Sexual harassment is a sensitive issue, though due to various reasons, the rate of reporting and providing justice to the victims is delayed all over the world including Bangladesh. There social, religious, and policy lacking in this context. -/- . (shrink)

In my paper recently published in a collection of controversial arguments in this journal, I argued that the same principles that are behind ethical veganism also warrant antinatalist conclusions. I thus suggested that to be consistent in their ethical reasoning, moral vegans should not have children. William Bülow has kindly responded to my claims and offered a plausible reply, which, according to him, concludes that at least some moral vegans may resist antinatalism. In this short paper, I reply to Bülow.

Biohacking is a grass-roots movement that brings the knowledge and experimen-tal practice of biological sciences to a non-specialized public. This article seeks to identify biohacking as a type of transhumanism and not just as a movement influenced by the latter. To do so, it examines the constitution, history, practi-ces, and moral codes of the biohacker movement. Subsequently, it compares the results with the definition of transhumanism, finding points of similarity in the hypotheses of both, as well as an adaptation of (...) transhumanist values to biohac-king. It concludes by identifying biohacking as a type of transhumanism. (shrink)

Purpose/Background. The present research focuses on the debate on transhumanism/bioconservatism from the perspective of empirical bioethics, that is, making use of em-pirical evidence in the process of moral reasoning. Its objective is to propose a metho-dological guide for the approach and resolution of moral problems concerning human enhancement. Methodology/Approach. The method Step-wise Ethical Human Enhancemet (SWEH) is proposed. It is a guide consisting of 11 questions that are the result of the adaptation of the guidelines for identifying a human enhancement (...) procedure as ethical developed by Julian Savulescu to the method of Step-wise Empirical Contributions elaborated by Pascal Borry. An applicative example on the morality of biohacking RFID implants is provided. Results/Findings. SWEH proposes that human enhancement procedures might be approached as specific problems and that the identified moral norm might be rewritten as a descriptive proposition that serves as a hypothesis that will be evaluated in the light of empirical evidence. The evaluation of the proposition, and thus of moral reasoning, will be done with the help of the information gathered by the 11 questions. Discussion/Conclusions/Contributions. SWEH can serve to provide a first answer on the morality of a specific human enhancement procedure, but not an absolute one, as the result may vary depending on the information obtained in the future. It also highli-ghts gaps in empirical research related to the procedure it addresses. The method is a first methodological guide that could be revised and improved. (shrink)

Kyle van Oosterum and Emma Curran have recently argued that the impairment argument against abortion is weak and accomplishes little. They also claim that impairment fails to explain what makes giving a child fetal alcohol syndrome (FAS) immoral, which is an important premise of the argument. Here, I explain that the impairment argument is not as weak as they believe. Further, I argue that impairment offers a superior explanation for what makes giving a child FAS immoral than their proposal based (...) on creative beneficence. (shrink)

This book summarizes the contributions at an April 2016 conference held at Albany Medical College, Reproductive Ethics: New Challenges and Conversations. Reproductive ethics does not suffer from a lack of challenging issues, yet a few "hot button" issues such as abortion and surrogacy seem to attract most of the attention, while other issues and dilemmas remain relatively underdeveloped in bioethics literature. The goal of this book is to explore and expand the range of topics addressed in reproductive ethics. This is (...) a multi-disciplinary book bringing together philosophers, clinicians, sociologists, anthropologists, and other scholars whose research or clinical interests touch reproductive issues. The results of this compilation are a comprehensive and unique discussion of the evolving issues in the rapidly changing field. The majority of the popular reproductive ethics anthologies were published at least 10 years ago. The field of reproductive ethics would benefit from a new anthology that addresses some of the perennial dilemmas in reproductive ethics (e.g. abortion, sex selection) from updated perspectives and that also covers new technologies that have emerged only in the last few years, such as social egg freezing. (shrink)

Many people find the manipulation of the human germline—editing the DNA of sperm or egg cells such that these genetic changes are passed to the resulting offspring—to be morally impermissible. In this paper, I argue for the claim that editing the human germline is morally permissible. My argument starts with the claim that outcome uncertainty regarding the effects of germline editing shows that the duty to not harm cannot ground the prohibition of germline editing. Instead, if germline editing is wrong, (...) it is wrong because it violates a duty to protect. However, we also have an epistemic duty to gather evidence regarding the effects of editing the human germline which overrides any moral duty to protect future generations. Thus, we have a duty to gather evidence regarding the effects of editing the human germline, which is to say that we have a duty to edit the human germline. (shrink)

Utilizing Trudy Govier’s (1997) conception of social trust, this dissertation will provide a framework for understanding trust in healthcare relationships and highlight some of the ways that unequal power distribution and dependency, poorly defined roles, and institutions complicate trust between women and their providers. This framework will also explain how distrust, especially prejudicial distrust, leads to paternalistic attitudes on the part of providers. Paternalism limits patient autonomy because medical autonomy is constitutively relational. This means that insofar as distrust causes paternalism, (...) it also damages autonomy. Through negative outcomes, this lack of autonomy can cause patients to distrust healthcare, which can contribute to a spiral of distrust between patients and providers. This dissertation will provide two contexts of how this distrust could play out in the clinical setting. The first conception involves lying as a response to testimonial injustice. When providers give patients a credibility deficit and distrust them to testify about their symptoms, providers may engage in the paternalistic practice of dismissing or minimizing the patient’s testimony in favor of their own assessment of the patient’s lived experience. If this practice is institutionalized, it can lead to a phenomenon known as testimonial silencing, where patients feel hopeless about their ability to convey information and distrust providers to take them seriously. This dissertation suggests that in order to overcome this silencing and reclaim autonomy in the patient-provider relationship, patients may lie to providers, not to deceive them, but in order to convey accurate information in a way that achieves perlocutionary success. The second conception deals with choice limitation in reproductive healthcare. In expanding the scope of reproductive coercion, it becomes evident that certain practices at the systematic or political level and at the clinical level should be defined as reproductive coercion. In order to explicate how reproductive choices, especially women’s choices, are restricted in multiple spheres, I argue that reproductive coercion occurs at three distinct levels of engagement with society: intimate, clinical, and systematic. By focusing on the clinical setting, the dissertation can demonstrate how paternalistic practices in healthcare, brought on by distrust in patients as decision-makers, can coerce women into certain reproductive choices that run counter to their autonomous preferences. (shrink)

In this essay, I argue that those who embrace animal rights should also embrace primitivism—the view that humans should abandon modern technology and take up something like hunter-gatherer technology instead. I call my view “animal-rights primitivism” to distinguish it from human-centered arguments for primitivism. In particular, I employ a vital-needs framework to make my argument. I argue that hunter-gatherer technology is the least harmful kind of technology, it is sufficient to meet human vital needs, and it is possible for humans (...) to make the transition to hunter-gatherer technology while still meeting their vital needs. Alternatively, I argue that even if humans cannot make the transition while still meeting their vital needs, they are responsible for putting themselves in that situation and therefore forfeit the right to aggress against other sentient species to do so. (shrink)

La obra incluye legislación de quince países, así como diversos documentos de la ONU, la UNESCO, el Consejo de Europa, la Unión Europea, Comités Nacionales de Ética, dictámenes y resoluciones de Instituciones Internacionales, jurisprudencia española y una selección bibliográfica con unas 1.300 referencias, clasificada por materias. Algunas leyes nacionales y los documentos del Consejo de Europa se publican traducidos al español y en su idioma original, cuando éste se ha considerado fácilmente asequible, con el fin de facilitar el acceso a (...) la fuente directa. (shrink)

v. 1. Introduction -- v. 2. Comparaison -- v. 3. Conclusion.

Medicine; religious aspects; laws and legislations.

Howard W. Jones, Jr.'s Personhood Revisited chronicles reproductive technology's debate-evoking history meanwhile exploring the ongoing moral dilemmas of the twenty-first century, including: personhood, in vitro fertilization, conjugal love, eugenics, cloning, stem cell research, and more. Balanced readings on each reproductive topic represent conflicting viewpoints from legal, religious, and scientific perspectives. And Jones' personal experiences, such as meetings with the Vatican, add a unique look into the highly political yet benevolent world of reproductive medicine. Author Howard W. Jones, Jr., alongside Robert (...) Edwards (winner of the Nobel Prize for Medicine 2010), fertilized the first human eggs in vitro. Jones and his wife, Georgeanna Seegar Jones, established the first in vitro fertilization program in the United States, which went on to develop America's first test tube baby in 1981. Book jacket. (shrink)

Bioethics, Volume 36, Issue 9, Page 999-1000, November 2022.

Human reproductive technology; law and legislation; religious aspects; Islam.

克隆人技术的发展给人类带来便利的同时，对宪法上的生命价值、人的尊严、社会和家庭秩序构成强烈冲击，需要积极予以立法应对。克隆人技术立法过程中，应以宪法上的生命与人的尊严为价值基础，遵循法律保留原则、民主 参与原则和比例原则的要求，在相互冲突的宪法价值中寻求合理的平衡。展望未来，我国应当以生命和人的尊严为价值基础建构刑法与行政法规制相结合的法律规制体系。.