What can European Principlism Teach about Public Funding of IVF? The Israeli Case

Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 18 (3):441-454 (2021)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Fertility treatments, which are part of "assisted reproductive technologies" (ART), mainly undertaken through in vitro fertilization (IVF), offer the opportunity to infertile couples to conceive. IVF treatments are undertaken in Israel in significantly higher numbers than in the rest of the world. As such, Israel provides an important case-in-point for examining the validity of the actual claims used to justify the more generous public funding of IVF treatments at the policy level. In this article, we utilize an analytical philosophy approach to conduct this examination. First, we highlight two fundamental concepts that were used at the Israeli public policy level in order to justify the generous public funding of IVF treatments. These concepts are “emotional vulnerability” and the “worthlessness of the childless,” where the latter emphasizes the infinite value of children. Then, by applying the perspective of the European model of Bioethical Principlism, and focusing the attention to these two concepts we show that these justifications are invalid. Specifically, it is suggested that these concepts are on the one hand both relying on and expressing the principles of vulnerability, dignity, and integrity; yet on the other hand, these concepts are also undermining the very principles of bioethics they are supposed to express and rely on. Based on this suggested criticism, we offer two “take home” messages informed by our analysis of the Israeli case, but reaching beyond it.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,219

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The Medical Nonnecessity of In Vitro Fertilization.Carolyn McLeod - 2017 - International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 10 (1):78-102.
The Method of Public Morality versus the Method of Principlism.R. M. Green, B. Gert & K. D. Clouser - 1993 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 18 (5):477-489.
Principlism and communitarianism.D. Callahan - 2003 - Journal of Medical Ethics 29 (5):287-291.
Defending principlism well understood.Michael Quante & Andreas Vieth - 2002 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 27 (6):621 – 649.
High court case: Williams v the commonwealth.Max Wallace - 2012 - The Australian Humanist 107 (107):5.
The method of 'principlism': A critique of the critique.B. Andrew Lustig - 1992 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 17 (5):487-510.

Analytics

Added to PP
2021-05-05

Downloads
16 (#855,572)

6 months
9 (#250,037)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

The Pensive Gaze.Michael A. Ashby & Bronwen Morrell - 2021 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 18 (3):365-370.

Add more citations

References found in this work

On Virtue Ethics.Rosalind Hursthouse - 1999 - Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Analysis.Michael Beaney - 2017 - Routledge.
Why bioethics needs a concept of vulnerability.Wendy Rogers, Catriona Mackenzie & Susan Dodds - 2012 - International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 5 (2):11-38.
Analysis.Michael Beaney - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

View all 18 references / Add more references