David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 7 (1):81-90 (2004)
This paper critically discusses an argument that is sometimes pressed into service in the ethical debate about the use of assisted reproduction. The argument runs roughly as follows: we should prevent women from using assisted reproduction techniques, because women who want to use the technology have been socially coerced into desiring children - and indeed have thereby been harmed by the patriarchal society in which they live. I call this the argument from coercion. Having clarified this argument, I conclude that although it addresses important issues, it is highly problematic for the following reasons. First, if women are being coerced to desire to use AR, we should eradicate the coercive elements in pro-natalist ideology, not access to AR. Second, the argument seems to have the absurd implication that we should prevent all woman, whether fertile or not, to try to have children. Third, it seems probable that women's welfare will be greater if we let well informed and decision-competent women decide for themselves whether they want to use AR
|Keywords||assisted reproduction autonomy coercion ethics feminism IVF women|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Thomas Søbirk Petersen (2004). A Woman's Choice? On Women, Assisted Reproduction and Social Coercion. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 7 (1):81 - 90.
Enrico Maestri (2011). Fabbriche Della Vita. La Critica Ecofemminista Alle Tecniche Riproduttive Artificiali. Ragion Pratica: Rivista semestrale 37 (2):417-442.
Carmel Shalev (2012). An Ethic of Care and Responsibility: Reflections on Third-Party Reproduction. Medicine Studies 3 (3):147-156.
Jyotsna Agnihotri Gupta & Annemiek Richters (2008). Embodied Subjects and Fragmented Objects: Women's Bodies, Assisted Reproduction Technologies and the Right to Self-Determination. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 5 (4):239-249.
Amanda R. Clarke (2011). Beyond Reproduction: Women's Health, Activism, and Public Policy. International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 4 (2):159-164.
Susan M. Purviance (1995). Infertility Treatment for Postmenopausal Patients: An Equity-Based Approach. Ethics and Behavior 5 (1):15 – 24.
Godfrey B. Tangwa (2008). Third Party Assisted Conception: An African Perspective. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 29 (5):297-306.
Judith Lorber (1989). Choice, Gift, or Patriarchal Bargain? Women's Consent to in Vitro Fertilization in Male Infertility. Hypatia 4 (3):23 - 36.
A. Dembinska (2012). Bioethical Dilemmas of Assisted Reproduction in the Opinions of Polish Women in Infertility Treatment: A Research Report. Journal of Medical Ethics 38 (12):731-734.
Mairi Levitt (2004). Assisted Reproduction: Managing an Unruly Technology. [REVIEW] Health Care Analysis 12 (1):41-49.
Anne Donchin (2009). Toward a Gender-Sensitive Assisted Reproduction Policy. Bioethics 23 (1):28-38.
Rosemarie Tong (1996). Feminist Bioethics: Toward Developing a "Feminist" Answer to the Surrogate Motherhood Question. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 6 (1):37-52.
Sarah Kofman & Mara Dukats (1989). Rousseau's Phallocratic Ends. Hypatia 3 (3):123 - 136.
Added to index2010-09-01
Total downloads9 ( #363,659 of 1,906,981 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #468,378 of 1,906,981 )
How can I increase my downloads?