American Journal of Bioethics 10 (7):3-12 (2010)
Since the first sex reassignment operations were performed, individual sex has come to be, to some extent at least, a technological artifact. The existence of sperm sorting technology, and of prenatal determination of fetal sex via ultrasound along with the option of termination, means that we now have the power to choose the sex of our children. An influential contemporary line of thought about medical ethics suggests that we should use technology to serve the welfare of individuals and to remove limitations on the opportunities available to them. I argue that, if these are our goals, we may do well to move towards a “post sex” humanity. Until we have the technology to produce genuine hermaphrodites, the most efficient way to do this is to use sex selection technology to ensure that only girl children are born. There are significant restrictions on the opportunities available to men, around gestation, childbirth, and breast-feeding, which will be extremely difficult to overcome via social or technological mechanisms for the foreseeable future. Women also have longer life expectancies than men. Girl babies therefore have a significantly more “open” future than boy babies. Resisting the conclusion that we should ensure that all children are born the same sex will require insisting that sexual difference is natural to human beings and that we should not use technology to reshape humanity beyond certain natural limits. The real concern of my paper, then, is the moral significance of the idea of a normal human body in modern medicine
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
Enhancing Evolution: The Ethical Case for Making Better People.John Harris - 2007 - Princeton University Press.
Procreative Beneficence: Why We Should Select the Best Children.Julian Savulescu - 2001 - Bioethics 15 (5-6):413-426.
Sexing the Body: Gender Politics and the Construction of Sexuality.Anne Fausto-Sterling & Edward Stein - 2004 - Hypatia 19 (3):203-208.
Life, Liberty, and the Defense of Dignity: The Challenge for Bioethics.Leon Kass - 2002 - Encounter Books.
Citations of this work BETA
Sexual Dimorphism and Human Enhancement.P. Casal - 2013 - Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (12):722-728.
Resisting Sparrow's Sexy Reductio : Selection Principles and the Social Good.Simon Rippon, Pablo Stafforini, Katrien Devolder, Russell Powell & Thomas Douglas - 2010 - American Journal of Bioethics 10 (7):16-18.
The Value of Sex in Procreative Reasons.Guy Kahane & Julian Savulescu - 2010 - American Journal of Bioethics 10 (7):22-24.
Sexual Dimorphism and Sexual Intermediaries.Thomas Marino - 2010 - American Journal of Bioethics 10 (7):24-25.
Similar books and articles
Sex Selection, Child Welfare and Risk: A Critique of the HFEA's Recommendations on Sex Selection.Tizzard Juliet - 2004 - Health Care Analysis 12 (1):61-68.
Sex Education as Moral Education: Teaching for Pleasure, About Fantasy, and Against Abuse.Sharon Lamb - 1997 - Journal of Moral Education 26 (3):301-315.
Naturalized Virtue Ethics and Same-Sex Love.Stephen R. Brown - 2006 - Philosophy in the Contemporary World 13 (1):41-47.
Truly Human Reproduction.Alexander R. Cohen - 2007 - Journal of Philosophical Research 32 (Supplement):305-313.
Analyses of Mating Differences Within-Sex and Between-Sex Are Complementary, Not Competing.Todd K. Shackelford, Gregory J. LeBlanc, Richard L. Michalski & Viviana A. Weekes - 2000 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (4):621-621.
Getting Past Nature as a Guide to the Human Sex Ratio.Timothy F. Murphy - 2013 - Bioethics 27 (4):224-232.
Added to index2010-07-12
Total downloads67 ( #77,251 of 2,157,997 )
Recent downloads (6 months)10 ( #35,128 of 2,157,997 )
How can I increase my downloads?