Journal of Medical Ethics 33 (5):284-288 (2007)
Why potential parents should select the best child of possible children, and the necessity of a dialogue about the context of a reproductive decision.The principle of Procreative Beneficence is the principle of selecting the best child of the possible children one could have. This principle is elaborated on and defended against a range of objections. In particular, focus is laid on four objections that Michael Parker raises: that it is underdetermining, that it is insensitive to the complex nature of the good, that it is self-defeating and that it is overly individualistic. Procreative Beneficence is a useful principle in reproductive decision-making. It is necessary to be more active in making selection decisions about what kind of child to have.Parker1 raises four objections to the principle of Procreative Beneficence . I will address these in turn. Procreative Beneficence is underdeterminingParker claims that Procreative Beneficence is underdetermining. By “underdetermining”, he means that the principle will not give clear and determinate answers as to which lives are better or best. Parker argues that “ranking possible lives as “better” or “worse” is “highly problematic”.Ranking lives is a very complex matter. Let us distinguish between: the value of a whole life and the value of an individual feature of a life .We should also distinguish between valuation ex ante and ex post . In Procreative Beneficence, I likened genetic testing to playing the wheel of fortune.2 Just because we have a weak chance of winning, does not mean we should not play the game. The only reason not to play a game that …
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Procreative Altruism: Beyond Individualism in Reproductive Selection.Thomas Douglas & Katrien Devolder - 2013 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 38 (4):400-419.
Don't Mind the Gap: Intuitions, Emotions, and Reasons in the Enhancement Debate.Alberto Giubilini - 2015 - Hastings Center Report 45 (5):39-47.
Reproductive Choice, Enhancement, and the Moral Continuum Argument.E. Malmqvist - 2014 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 39 (1):41-54.
Procreative Beneficence, Intelligence, and the Optimization Problem.Ben Saunders - 2015 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 40 (6):653-668.
Selecting Children: The Ethics of Reproductive Genetic Engineering.S. Matthew Liao - 2008 - Philosophy Compass 3 (5):973-991.
Similar books and articles
The Principle of Procreative Beneficence: Old Arguments and A New Challenge.Andrew Hotke - 2014 - Bioethics 28 (5):255-262.
The Fallacy of the Principle of Procreative Beneficence.Rebecca Bennett - 2009 - Bioethics 23 (5):265-273.
Procreative Beneficence: Why We Should Select the Best Children.Julian Savulescu - 2001 - Bioethics 15 (5-6):413-426.
Intelligence, Wellbeing and Procreative Beneficence.J. Adam Carter & Emma C. Gordon - 2013 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 30 (2):122-135.
Wrongs, Preferences, and the Selection of Children: A Critique of Rebecca Bennett's Argument Against the Principle of Procreative Beneficence.Peter Herissone-Kelly - 2012 - Bioethics 26 (8):447-454.
Procreative Beneficence, Obligation, and Eugenics.Robert Sparrow - 2007 - Genomics, Society and Policy 3 (3):43-59.
Procreative Beneficence, Obligation, and Eugenics.Sparrow Robert - 2007 - Genomics, Society, and Policy 3 (3):43-59.
Procreative Beneficence and the Prospective Parent.P. Herissone-Kelly - 2006 - Journal of Medical Ethics 32 (3):166-169.
The Moral Obligation to Create Children with the Best Chance of the Best Life.Julian Savulescu & Guy Kahane - 2009 - Bioethics 23 (5):274-290.
Procreative Reasons-Relevance: On the Moral Significance of Why We Have Children.Mianna Lotz - 2009 - Bioethics 23 (5):291-299.
Storks, Cabbage Patches, and the Right to Procreate.Yvette E. Pearson - 2007 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 4 (2):105-115.
Dignity Promotion and Beneficence.Diego S. Silva - 2010 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 7 (4):365-372.
Coercive Population Policies, Procreative Freedom, and Morality.R. Juha - 2001 - Philosophy and Geography 4 (1):67 – 77.
Added to index2010-08-24
Total downloads60 ( #86,167 of 2,158,298 )
Recent downloads (6 months)9 ( #38,007 of 2,158,298 )
How can I increase my downloads?