Another Defense of Abortion: What Transplant Ethics Tells Us about the Ethics of Abortion after Dobbs

IF 2.3 3区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
Devora Shapiro, Jeffrey Pannekoek
{"title":"Another Defense of Abortion: What Transplant Ethics Tells Us about the Ethics of Abortion after Dobbs","authors":"Devora Shapiro,&nbsp;Jeffrey Pannekoek","doi":"10.1002/hast.1582","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p><i>In 1971, two years before</i> Roe v. Wade <i>affirmed federal protection for abortion, Judith Jarvis Thomson attempted to demonstrate the wrongs of forced gestation through analogy: you awake to find that the world's most esteemed violinist is wholly, physically dependent on you for life support. Here, the authors suggest that Thomson's intuition, that there is a relevant similarity between providing living kidney support and forced gestation, is realized in the contemporary practice of living organ donation. After detailing the robust analogy between living kidney donation and gestation, we turn to current ethical guidelines incorporated in the United Network for Organ Sharing's requirements for legally authorized organ donation and transplantation. We conclude that if, as we—and Thomson—suggest, organ donation and gestation are relevantly similar, then the ethical framework supporting donation may aid in articulating ethical grounds that will be compelling in informing the legal grounds for a defense of abortion</i>.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":55073,"journal":{"name":"Hastings Center Report","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/hast.1582","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hastings Center Report","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hast.1582","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In 1971, two years before Roe v. Wade affirmed federal protection for abortion, Judith Jarvis Thomson attempted to demonstrate the wrongs of forced gestation through analogy: you awake to find that the world's most esteemed violinist is wholly, physically dependent on you for life support. Here, the authors suggest that Thomson's intuition, that there is a relevant similarity between providing living kidney support and forced gestation, is realized in the contemporary practice of living organ donation. After detailing the robust analogy between living kidney donation and gestation, we turn to current ethical guidelines incorporated in the United Network for Organ Sharing's requirements for legally authorized organ donation and transplantation. We conclude that if, as we—and Thomson—suggest, organ donation and gestation are relevantly similar, then the ethical framework supporting donation may aid in articulating ethical grounds that will be compelling in informing the legal grounds for a defense of abortion.

堕胎的另一种辩护:多布斯之后移植伦理对堕胎伦理的启示》。
1971 年,在 "罗伊诉韦德 "案确认联邦保护堕胎的两年前,朱迪斯-贾维斯-汤姆森试图通过类比来证明强迫妊娠的错误:你醒来时发现世界上最受尊敬的小提琴家完全依赖于你的生命支持。在此,作者认为汤姆森的直觉,即提供活体肾脏支持与强迫妊娠之间存在相关的相似性,在当代活体器官捐赠的实践中得以实现。在详细阐述了活体肾脏捐献与妊娠之间的有力类比之后,我们转而讨论了器官共享联合网络(United Network for Organ Sharing)对合法授权的器官捐献和移植要求中所包含的现行伦理准则。我们的结论是,如果正如我们--以及汤姆森--所建议的那样,器官捐赠与妊娠具有相关的相似性,那么支持捐赠的伦理框架可能有助于阐明伦理理由,而这些理由在为堕胎辩护的法律依据提供信息时将是令人信服的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Hastings Center Report
Hastings Center Report 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
3.00%
发文量
99
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Hastings Center Report explores ethical, legal, and social issues in medicine, health care, public health, and the life sciences. Six issues per year offer articles, essays, case studies of bioethical problems, columns on law and policy, caregivers’ stories, peer-reviewed scholarly articles, and book reviews. Authors come from an assortment of professions and academic disciplines and express a range of perspectives and political opinions. The Report’s readership includes physicians, nurses, scholars, administrators, social workers, health lawyers, and others.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信