Abstract
The paper presents a comparative analysis of the evolution of the legislative process concerning ART (especially PGD) in the specific cultural, societal and political contexts of two countries- Slovakia and Germany. Our analysis is based on 1. mapping the variety of discourses on ART in order to gain an understanding of the perspectives of the main actors and their arguments; and on 2. exploring the reasons for the differences in the current regulation of ART among European Union member states. In both Slovakia and Germany we found there was a deficit of democratic legitimacy, because the arguments and experiences of those primarily affected by the restrictive measures on the use of ART in medical care-infertile women and men-are not taken into consideration with any seriousness. On the contrary, government and legislators pay too much attention to the ethical opinions of the Catholic Church. Government intervention in Germany is highly problematic because there is no sufficient justification of the reasons behind restrictions on parental autonomy and the procreative freedom of women and men. Moreover, the restrictions are not consistent across an array of similar cases and are not applied equally to all (they differ depending on whether the embryo is in vivo or in vitro and healthy or unhealthy). Instead of an interventionist approach which protects the embryo against its own potential mother, it would be more sensible to adopt the “women-centered” approach already suggested by several authors (see for instance Freedman & Isaacs, 1993, Himmel & Michelmann, 2007). It holds that both the mother and embryo have to be at the centre of bioethical and legal considerations, instead of there being an exclusive reliance on ethical principles and expert opinions with regard to the embryo alone
References
Bandura, A. (1969). Social-learning theory of identificatory processes. In D. A. Goslin (Ed.), Handbook of socialization theory and research. Chicago: Rand McNally and Company.Search in Google Scholar
Boston Women’s Health Book Collective (1973). Our bodies, ourselves: A book by and for women. New York: Simon and Schuster.Search in Google Scholar
Boston Women’s Health Book Collective (1976). Our bodies, ourselves: A book by and for women. (Rev.ed.). New York: Simon and Schuster.Search in Google Scholar
Brännström, M., Johannesson, L., Bokström, H., Kvarnström, N., Mölne, J., Dahm-Kähler, P., Enskog, A., Milenkovic, M., Ekberg, J., Diaz-Garcia, C., Gäbel, M., Hanafy, A., Hagberg, H., Olausson, M., & Nilsson, L. (2014). Livebirth after uterus transplantation. The Lancet.10.1016/S0140-6736(14)61728-1Search in Google Scholar
Buchanan, A. (1978). Medical paternalism. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 7(4), 370-390.Search in Google Scholar
Childress, J. F., Faden, R.R., Gaare, R.D., Gostin, L. O., Kahn, J., Bonnie, R. J., Kass, N. E., Mastroianni, A. C., Moreno, & J. D., Nieburg, P.(2002). Public health ethics: Mapping the terrain. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 30, 170-178.10.1111/j.1748-720X.2002.tb00384.xSearch in Google Scholar
Chin, J. J. (2002). Doctor-patient relationship: From medical paternalism to enhanced autonomy. Singapore Medical Journal, 43(3), 152-155.Search in Google Scholar
Core, H. (1985).The mother machine: Reproductive technologies from artificial insemination to artificial wombs. New York: Harper and Raw.Search in Google Scholar
Corveleyn, A., Zika, E., Morris, M. et al. (2007). Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis in Europe. European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Prospective Technologies Studies.Search in Google Scholar
Donum vitae (1987). http://www.cin.org/vatcong/donumvit.html Dudová, R. (2010). The framing of abortion in the Czech Republic: How the continuity of discourse prevents institutional change. Sociologický časopis/ Czech Sociological Review, 46(6), 954.10.13060/00380288.2010.46.6.04Search in Google Scholar
The European Forum for Good Clinical Practice (EFGCP). (2011). Report on the Procedure for the Ethical Review of Protocols for Clinical Research Projects in Europe.Search in Google Scholar
Falkum, E., & Førde, R. (2001). Paternalism, patient autonomy, and moral deliberation in the physicianpatient relationship: Attitudes among Norwegian physicians. Social Science and Medicine, 52, 239-248.10.1016/S0277-9536(00)00224-0Search in Google Scholar
Fathalla, M. F. (2002). Current challenges in assisted reproduction. In E. Vayena, P.J. Rowe, & P.D. Griffin (Eds.), Current practices and controversies in assisted reproduction. Report of a meeting on Medical, Ethical and Social Aspects of Assisted Reproduction (pp. 3-11). World Health Organization, Geneva.Search in Google Scholar
Firestone, S. (1970). The dialectic of sex: The case for feminist revolution. New York: Bantam Books.Search in Google Scholar
FOCUS pre Forum zivota. (2014). Spoločenská morálka na Slovensku [Social morality in Slovakia], May 2014. http://www.forumzivota.sk/2014/07/08/spolocenska-moralka-na-slovensku/#comments.Search in Google Scholar
Fotion, N. Paternalism. (1979). Ethics, 89, 191-198.10.1086/292096Search in Google Scholar
Freedman, L. P., & Isaacs, S. L. (1993). Human Rights and Reproductive Choice. Studies in Family Planning, 24, 18-30.10.2307/2939211Search in Google Scholar
Gianaroli, L., Magli, C., M., & Ferraretti, A. P. (2002). In E. Vayena, P.J. Rowe, & P.D. Griffin (Eds.). Current practices and controversies in assisted reproduction. Report of a meeting on Medical, Ethical and Social Aspects of Assisted Reproduction (pp. 210-219). World Health Organization, Geneva.Search in Google Scholar
Gleicher, N., et al. (2008). Preimplantation genetic screening: “Established” and ready for prime time? Fertility and Sterility, 89, 780-788.10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.01.072Search in Google Scholar
Ginsburg, F. D., & Rapp, R. (Eds). (1982).Conceiving a new world order: The global politics of reproduction. Berkeley: University of California Press.Search in Google Scholar
Habermas, J. (2002). Die Zukunft der menschlichen Natur: auf dem Weg zu einer liberalen Eugenik? Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Search in Google Scholar
Harper, J., C., Geraedts, J., Borry, P. et al. (2013). Current issues in medically assisted reproduction and genetics in Europe: Research, clinical practice, ethics, legal issues and policy. European Journal of Genetics, 14.10.1038/ejhg.2013.219Search in Google Scholar
Häyry, M. (2010). Rationality and the genetic challenge: Making people better? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139194679Search in Google Scholar
Himmel, W., & Michelmann, H. W. (2007). Access to genetic material: reproductive technologies and bioethical issues. Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 15(1), 18-24. Available at www.rbmonline.com/Article/2891 (Retrieved 18 July 2007).10.1016/S1472-6483(10)60354-9Search in Google Scholar
Hogan, R. M., & Le Voir, J. M. (1985). Covenant of love: Pope John Paul II on sexuality, marriage, and family in the modern world, 37.Search in Google Scholar
Jonsen, A. R., Veatch, R. M., & Walters, L. (1998). Source book in bioethics: A documentary history (pp. 5-10). Washington:Georgetown University Press.Search in Google Scholar
King, D. S. (1999). Preimplantation genetic diagnosis and the ‘new’ eugenics. J Med Ethics, 25(2), 176-82.10.1136/jme.25.2.176Search in Google Scholar
Kliment, M. (2000, 2001). Základná zmluva medzi SR a Svätou stolicou z hľadiska sexuálneho a reprodukčného zdravia a sexuálnych a reprodukčných práv. [The Basic Treaty between the Slovak Republic and the Holy See from the viewpoint of sexual and reproductive rights and reproductive health and sexual and reproductive rights.] Aspekt 13, 2/2000-1/2001, 281.Search in Google Scholar
Krones, T., Schlüter, E., Manolopoulos, K., Bock, K., Tinneberg, H. R., Koch, M. C., Lindner, M., Hoffmann, G. F., Mayatepek, E., Huels, G., Neuwohner, E., Ansari, S. E., Wissner, T., Richter, G. et al. (2005). Public, experts, and patients’ opinion on preimplantation genetic diagnosis PGD in Germany. Reproductive Biomedicine Online, 10, 116-123.10.1016/S1472-6483(10)60812-7Search in Google Scholar
Krones, T., Schlüter, E., Neuwohner, E., Ansari, S., Wissner, T., & Richter, G. (2006). What is the preimplantation embryo? Social Sciences & Medicine, 63, 1-20.10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.12.014Search in Google Scholar
Kuliev, A., & Verlinsky, Y. (2003).The role of preimplantation genetic diagnosis in women of advanced reproductive age. Current Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology, 15, 233-238.10.1097/00001703-200306000-00004Search in Google Scholar
Kullmann, K. (2013). Genetic risks: The implications of embryo screening. Der Spiegel. (Retrieved 31 March 2014).Search in Google Scholar
Kushe, H., & Singer, P. (1990). Individuals, humans and persons: The issue of moral status. In P. Singer et al. (Ed.), Embryo experimentation. Ethical, legal and social issues (pp. 65-75). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139172325.009Search in Google Scholar
Ludwig M., Klaus D., & Schwinger, E. (2001). Preimplantation genetic diagnosis: the German situation. Trends in Genetics, 17(8), 473-474 Storrow, R. F. (2011). Religion, feminisms and abortion: The regulation of assisted reproduction in two Catholic countries. Rutgers Law Journal, 42, 725-764.10.1016/S0168-9525(01)02362-9Search in Google Scholar
Luna, F. (2002). Assisted reproductive technology in Latin America: some ethical and sociocultural issues. In E. Vayena, P. J. Rowe, & P. D. Griffin (Eds.), Current practices and controversies in assisted reproduction. Report of a meeting on Medical, Ethical and Social Aspects of Assisted Reproduction (pp. 31-40). World Health Organization, Geneva.Search in Google Scholar
Lysaught, T. M. (2004). Respect: Or, how respect for persons became respect for autonomy. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 29(6), 665-680.10.1080/03605310490883028Search in Google Scholar
Malter, H. M., & Cohen, J. (2002). Intracytoplasmatic sperm injection: technical aspects. In E. Vayena, P.J. Rowe, P.D. Griffin (Eds.), Current practices and controversies in assisted reproduction. Report of a meeting on Medical, Ethical and Social Aspects of Assisted Reproduction (pp. 126-133). World Health Organization, Geneva.Search in Google Scholar
McKinstry, B. (1992). Paternalism and the doctor-patient relationship in general practice. British Journal of General Practice, 42, 340-342.Search in Google Scholar
Musilová, D. (2007). Z ženského pohledu. Poslankyně a senátorky Národního zhromáždění Československé republiky 1918-1939. České Budejovice.Search in Google Scholar
Neyer, G., & Bernardi, L. (2011). Feminist perspectives on motherhood and assisted reproduction. Historical Social Research, 36(2), 162-176.Search in Google Scholar
Pateman, C. (1988).The sexual contract. Stanford: Standford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Petrjánošová, M., Moulin-Doos, C., & Plichtová, J. (2008). The debate over reproductive rights in Germany and Slovakia: Religious and secular voices, a blurred political spectrum and many inconsistencies. Politics in Central Europe, 4(2), 61-78.Search in Google Scholar
Pietruchová, O. (2005). Výhrada svedomia ako ideologická zbraň. www. Changenet. Sk (downloaded 14.9.2014).Search in Google Scholar
Plichtová, J., & Petrjánošová, M. (2008). Freedom of religion, institution of conscientious objection and political practice in post-communist Slovakia. Human Affairs, 18(1), 37-51.10.2478/v10023-008-0004-6Search in Google Scholar
Plichtová, J. Petrjánošová, M., & Moolin-Doos, C. (2009). Perché uno stato liberale non dovrebbe intervenire a difesa dell´embrione nel caso della diagnosi genetica pre-impianto? Un confronto tra Germania e Slovacchia. Notizei di Politeia, 25(95), 72-85.Search in Google Scholar
Plichtová, J., Constantini, D., & Petrjánošová, M. (2008). The state, religious pluralism and its legal instruments in Italy and Slovakia. Politics in Central Europe, 4(2), 79-98.Search in Google Scholar
Rendtorff, J. D. (2002). Basic ethical principles in European bioethics and biolaw: Autonomy, dignity, integrity and vulnerability - towards a foundation of bioethics and biolaw. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, 5, 235-244.10.1023/A:1021132602330Search in Google Scholar
Rothstein, M. A. (2002). Rethinking the meaning of public health. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 30, 144-149.10.1111/j.1748-720X.2002.tb00381.xSearch in Google Scholar
Sarojini, N., Marwah, V., & Shenoi, A. (2011). Globalisation of birth markets: a case study of assisted reproductive technologies in India. //www.globalizationand health.com/content/7/1/27, 201110.1186/1744-8603-7-27Search in Google Scholar
Serour, G. I, Aboulghar, M., & Mansour, R. (1997). Tubal and pelvic iatrogenic infertility in the female. Egyptian Journal of Fertility and Sterility, 1, 31-40.Search in Google Scholar
Shakespeare, T. (2005). Ethics watch, sex selection. Nat Genet Rev, 6, 666.10.1038/nrg1701Search in Google Scholar
Soini, S, Ibarreta, D., Anastasiadou, V. et al. (2006). The interface between assisted reproductive technologies and genetics: technical, ethical and legal issues. European Journal of Human Genetics, 14, 588-645.10.1038/sj.ejhg.5201598Search in Google Scholar
Sarojini, N., & Vrinda Marwah (Eds.). (2014). Reconfiguring reproduction: Feminist health perspectives on assisted reproductive technologies. Zubaan Books.Search in Google Scholar
Stainton, T. (2003). Identity, difference and the ethical politics of prenatal testing. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research 47(7), 533-39.10.1046/j.1365-2788.2003.00532.xSearch in Google Scholar
Stanworth, M. (1987). Reproductive technologies and the deconstruction of motherhood. In M.Search in Google Scholar
Stanworth (Ed.), Reproductive technologies: Gender, motherhood and medicine. Cambridge: Polity Press. Storrow, R. F. (2011). Religion, feminisms and abortion: The regulation of assisted reproduction in two Catholic countries. Rutgers Law Journal, 42, 725-764.Search in Google Scholar
Van Steirteghem, A. (2002). Intracytoplasmatic sperm injection: micromanipulation in assisted fertilization. In E. Vayena, P.J. Rowe, & P.D. Griffin (Eds.), Current practices and controversies in assisted reproduction. Report of a meeting on Medical, Ethical and Social Aspects of Assisted Reproduction (pp. 134-141). World Health Organization, Geneva.Search in Google Scholar
Thomasello, M. (2003). The key is social cognition. In D. Gentner & S. Kuczaj (Eds.), Language and thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
Wiesemann, C. (2003). Wie kann über den Embryo in einer lebensweltlich angemessenen Wiese gesprochen werde? Eine Kritik der Debatte um den moralischen Status des Embryos. In S. Grauman & I. Schneider (Eds.), Verkörperte Technik - Entkörperte Frau. Frankfurt am Main: Campus. Search in Google Scholar
© Institute for Research in Social Communication, Slovak Academy of Sciences
