David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Medical Ethics 35 (6):373-376 (2009)
The welfare of the child is the prevailing principle and concern regarding access to assisted reproduction in Western countries today, and there is a wish to avoid harm to future children. New research fields have developed in order to provide scientific evidence on the welfare of children living with different “types” of parents. Assisted reproductive technologies (ART) seems to be heading in a responsible direction where the care and concern for future children is vital. However, the claim of this article is that the principle of the welfare of the child confuses the ethical framing of ART. Several philosophers in the past have argued that potential people must be regarded as outside the moral domain, and therefore cannot be harmed or benefitted. This message has not reached the policymakers, probably because the welfare of the child principle seems to fit so elegantly with common sense. In this article a different ethical framing of ART is proposed. The author argues that “futile care” and not “the welfare of the child” should be the guiding principle for eventually rejecting access to ART. The desired goal of ART treatment should be understood to be the production of functional families. Assisted reproduction is primarily about us, actual people in an actual society, and how potential children may affect us
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Carol van Nijnatten (2010). Children's Agency, Children's Welfare: A Dialogical Approach to Child Development, Policy and Practice. Policy Press.
Carmel Shalev (2012). An Ethic of Care and Responsibility: Reflections on Third-Party Reproduction. Medicine Studies 3 (3):147-156.
Thomas Søbirk Petersen (2004). A Woman's Choice? On Women, Assisted Reproduction and Social Coercion. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 7 (1):81 - 90.
Thomas Søbirk Petersen (2004). A Woman's Choice? – On Women, Assisted Reproduction and Social Coercion. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 7 (1):81-90.
John Harris (2000). The Welfare of the Child. Health Care Analysis 8 (1):27-34.
Karinne Ludlow, What About Me: How Far Do We Go in the Best Interest of the Child in Assisted Reproductive Technology.
Godfrey B. Tangwa (2008). Third Party Assisted Conception: An African Perspective. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 29 (5):297-306.
Hallvard Lillehammer (2009). Reproduction, Partiality, and the Non-Identity Problem. In M. A. Roberts & D. T. Wasserman (eds.), Harming Future Persons. Springer Verlag. 231--248.
Carly Anne Evans (2009). Ethical Implications of Child Welfare Policies in England and Wales on Child Participation Rights. Ethics and Social Welfare 3 (1):95-101.
Jacqueline A. Laing (2005). Artificial Reproduction, the 'Welfare Principle', and the Common Good. Medical Law Review 13:328-356.
Anne Donchin (2011). In Whose Interest? Policy and Politics in Assisted Reproduction. Bioethics 25 (2):92-101.
Beatrice Ioan & Vasile Astarastoae (2013). Ethical and Legal Aspects in Medically Assisted Human Reproduction in Romania. Human Reproduction and Genetic Ethics 14 (2):4 - 13.
Maura Anne Ryan (1995). The New Reproductive Technologies: Defying God's Dominion? Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 20 (4):419-438.
Anthony Skelton (forthcoming). Utilitarianism, Welfare, Children. In Alexander Bagattini & Colin Macleod (eds.), The Well-being of Children in Theory and Practice. Springer.
Added to index2010-09-13
Total downloads5 ( #176,011 of 1,008,176 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,735 of 1,008,176 )
How can I increase my downloads?