Excluding indigenous bioethical concerns when regulating frozen embryo storage: An Aotearoa New Zealand case study

Q1 Social Sciences
Ruth P. Fitzgerald , Michael Legge , Poia Rewi , Ella J. Robinson
{"title":"Excluding indigenous bioethical concerns when regulating frozen embryo storage: An Aotearoa New Zealand case study","authors":"Ruth P. Fitzgerald ,&nbsp;Michael Legge ,&nbsp;Poia Rewi ,&nbsp;Ella J. Robinson","doi":"10.1016/j.rbms.2019.01.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This article undertakes a close reading of the parliamentary debates associated with the topic of embryo cryopreservation in Aotearoa New Zealand. From our critical readings, we argue that there is a lack of transparency over the ethical reasons for enforcing a maximum storage limit. We demonstrate that arguments for the retention of this limit are associated (in New Zealand) with arguments based upon ‘build-up avoidance’ and ‘conflict avoidance’ as social goods based on Pākehā [New Zealander of European descent] cultural world views rather than identifiable universal ethical principles. We illustrate that the avoidance of embryo accumulation and related conflict was only achieved by the denial of indigenous spiritual and cultural concerns, while also shifting the ethical burdens of disposition on to clinic staff and those members of the public who protested against enforced cryopreserved embryo disposal. The Pākehā cultural concept of ‘tidy housekeeping’ emerges as a presumed ethical and social good in the New Zealand situation. This is despite abundant literature documenting the suffering created through forced decision-making upon disposition.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":37973,"journal":{"name":"Reproductive Biomedicine and Society Online","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.rbms.2019.01.001","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reproductive Biomedicine and Society Online","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405661819300024","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

This article undertakes a close reading of the parliamentary debates associated with the topic of embryo cryopreservation in Aotearoa New Zealand. From our critical readings, we argue that there is a lack of transparency over the ethical reasons for enforcing a maximum storage limit. We demonstrate that arguments for the retention of this limit are associated (in New Zealand) with arguments based upon ‘build-up avoidance’ and ‘conflict avoidance’ as social goods based on Pākehā [New Zealander of European descent] cultural world views rather than identifiable universal ethical principles. We illustrate that the avoidance of embryo accumulation and related conflict was only achieved by the denial of indigenous spiritual and cultural concerns, while also shifting the ethical burdens of disposition on to clinic staff and those members of the public who protested against enforced cryopreserved embryo disposal. The Pākehā cultural concept of ‘tidy housekeeping’ emerges as a presumed ethical and social good in the New Zealand situation. This is despite abundant literature documenting the suffering created through forced decision-making upon disposition.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

在规范冷冻胚胎储存时排除土著生物伦理问题:一个新西兰奥特罗阿的案例研究
这篇文章进行了细致的阅读议会辩论有关胚胎冷冻保存的话题在新西兰奥特罗阿。从我们的批判性阅读来看,我们认为执行最大存储限制的道德原因缺乏透明度。我们证明,保留这一限制的论点(在新西兰)与基于Pākehā[欧洲血统的新西兰人]文化世界观而不是可识别的普遍伦理原则的社会商品的“避免积累”和“避免冲突”的论点有关。我们说明,避免胚胎积累和相关冲突只能通过否认土著精神和文化问题来实现,同时也将处理的伦理负担转移到诊所工作人员和那些抗议强制冷冻胚胎处理的公众成员身上。在新西兰的情况下,Pākehā文化概念“整洁的家务”作为一种假定的道德和社会利益出现。尽管有大量文献记录了在处置过程中被迫决策所造成的痛苦。
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
Reproductive Biomedicine and Society Online
Reproductive Biomedicine and Society Online Social Sciences-Cultural Studies
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
23
审稿时长
7 weeks
期刊介绍: RBMS is a new journal dedicated to interdisciplinary discussion and debate of the rapidly expanding field of reproductive biomedicine, particularly all of its many societal and cultural implications. It is intended to bring to attention new research in the social sciences, arts and humanities on human reproduction, new reproductive technologies, and related areas such as human embryonic stem cell derivation. Its audience comprises researchers, clinicians, practitioners, policy makers, academics and patients.
×
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