“Throwing baby out with the bath water#x201d;: Some reflections on the evolution of reproductive technology}
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Res Publica 5 (1):45-65 (1999)
This article discusses section 156 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 which prohibits the use of eggs from aborted female foetuses for the purposes of reproduction. I argue that the pre-legislative debates focus only on the biological relationship between the aborted foetus and any ensuing child and foreclose the possibility of useful discussion about the potential merits of such technology. Kristeva's theory of abjection has been used in order to elucidate the strength of feeling about the use of eggs from the expelled foetus. I suggest that the ‘yuk’ factor stems from the potential for the blurring of the boundaries between life and death. In addition, I suggest that the stress placed on the biological link means that the foetus is ascribed special properties not given to live donors. Woman's very crucial role in reproductive technologies is therefore erased. The article argues that there are very good reasons why the debate on the subject should remain open. At present women donors have to undergo highly intrusive procedures in order to give eggs and the process is not without its health risks. The use of eggs from aborted foetuses certainly raises important consent issues but these could be addressed by placing women at the centre of the decision making process, starting with the recognition that it is women and not foetuses who have the remit and responsibility for giving consent for the use of their genetic material. Moreover, there should be an acknowledgement that women are perfectly capable of making informed decisions about donation and of considering the potential implications of participating in egg donation.
|Keywords||eggs foetuses women reproduction Kristeva|
|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
Anne Pollock (2003). Complicating Power in High-Tech Reproduction: Narratives of Anonymous Paid Egg Donors. [REVIEW] Journal of Medical Humanities 24 (3-4):241-263.
Jennifer Parks (2009). Rethinking Radical Politics in the Context of Assisted Reproductive Technology. Bioethics 23 (1):20-27.
Imogen Goold & Julian Savulescu (2009). In Favour of Freezing Eggs for Non-Medical Reasons. Bioethics 23 (1):47-58.
Angela Ballantyne & Sheryl De Lacey (2008). Wanted—Egg Donors for Research: A Research Ethics Approach to Donor Recruitment and Compensation. International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 1 (2):145 - 164.
Françoise Baylis & Carolyn McLeod (2007). The Stem Cell Debate Continues: The Buying and Selling of Eggs for Research. Journal of Medical Ethics 33 (12):726-731.
Donna Dickenson & Itziar Alkorta Idiakez (2008). Ova Donation for Stem Cell Research: An International Perspective. International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 1 (2):125 - 144.
Greta Gaard (2010). Reproductive Technology, or Reproductive Justice?: An Ecofeminist, Environmental Justice Perspective on the Rhetoric of Choice. Ethics and the Environment 15 (2):103-129.
Karey Harwood (2009). Egg Freezing: A Breakthrough for Reproductive Autonomy? Bioethics 23 (1):39-46.
S. Kerrison (2005). The Reform of UK Research Ethics Committees: Throwing the Baby Out with the Bath Water? Journal of Medical Ethics 31 (8):487-489.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads31 ( #152,993 of 1,940,948 )
Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #197,835 of 1,940,948 )
How can I increase my downloads?