Is Reproduction Women's Business? How Should We Regulate Regarding Stored Embryos, Posthumous Pregnancy, Ectogenesis and Male Pregnancy?

R. Bennett
{"title":"Is Reproduction Women's Business? How Should We Regulate Regarding Stored Embryos, Posthumous Pregnancy, Ectogenesis and Male Pregnancy?","authors":"R. Bennett","doi":"10.2202/1941-6008.1037","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Traditionally reproduction, gestation and childbirth have all been regarded as being primarily a woman's domain. As natural reproduction occurs inside a woman's body, respect for autonomy and bodily integrity requires the pregnant woman to have the conclusive say over the fate of the embryo/fetus growing within her. Thus traditionally the ethics and law of reproduction is dominated by the importance of respecting women's reproductive choices. This paper argues that emerging technologies demand a radical rethink of ethics and law in the area of reproduction. The creation and storing of embryos outside of a woman's body and maintaining a pregnancy in a brain dead woman's body and future possibilities such as ectogenesis and male pregnancy raise important issues that cannot simply be answered by appealing to the rights of women to control their bodies. There are those who argue that when reproduction or reproductive products exist outside of a woman's body each gamete donor should have an equal say over the fate of the embryo/fetus. Others, however, argue that giving an equal say to gamete donors in practice usually means allowing the male donor to veto the reproductive enterprise and this is unacceptable. As a result it has been suggested that women should be favoured when it comes to such reproductive choices. This paper examines both sides of this debate in order to answer the fundamental ethical and policy question: 'Is there any reason why women should necessarily retain control over reproduction rather than simply over their own bodies?'","PeriodicalId":88318,"journal":{"name":"Studies in ethics, law, and technology","volume":"2 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2202/1941-6008.1037","citationCount":"13","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in ethics, law, and technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2202/1941-6008.1037","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

Abstract

Traditionally reproduction, gestation and childbirth have all been regarded as being primarily a woman's domain. As natural reproduction occurs inside a woman's body, respect for autonomy and bodily integrity requires the pregnant woman to have the conclusive say over the fate of the embryo/fetus growing within her. Thus traditionally the ethics and law of reproduction is dominated by the importance of respecting women's reproductive choices. This paper argues that emerging technologies demand a radical rethink of ethics and law in the area of reproduction. The creation and storing of embryos outside of a woman's body and maintaining a pregnancy in a brain dead woman's body and future possibilities such as ectogenesis and male pregnancy raise important issues that cannot simply be answered by appealing to the rights of women to control their bodies. There are those who argue that when reproduction or reproductive products exist outside of a woman's body each gamete donor should have an equal say over the fate of the embryo/fetus. Others, however, argue that giving an equal say to gamete donors in practice usually means allowing the male donor to veto the reproductive enterprise and this is unacceptable. As a result it has been suggested that women should be favoured when it comes to such reproductive choices. This paper examines both sides of this debate in order to answer the fundamental ethical and policy question: 'Is there any reason why women should necessarily retain control over reproduction rather than simply over their own bodies?'
生育是女人的事吗?储存胚胎、死后妊娠、体外生殖和男性妊娠应如何监管?
传统上,生殖、怀孕和分娩都被认为主要是女性的领域。由于自然生殖发生在妇女体内,尊重自主权和身体完整要求孕妇对在她体内生长的胚胎/胎儿的命运有决定性的发言权。因此,传统上关于生殖的伦理和法律被尊重妇女生育选择的重要性所支配。本文认为,新兴技术要求对生殖领域的伦理和法律进行彻底的反思。在女性体外创造和储存胚胎,在脑死亡女性体内维持妊娠,以及未来的可能性,如体外生殖和男性妊娠,这些都提出了重要的问题,不能简单地通过呼吁女性控制自己身体的权利来解决。有些人认为,当生殖或生殖产品存在于女性身体之外时,每个配子捐赠者都应该对胚胎/胎儿的命运有平等的发言权。然而,其他人认为,在实践中给予配子捐赠者平等的发言权通常意味着允许男性捐赠者否决生殖事业,这是不可接受的。因此,有人建议,当涉及到这种生育选择时,应该优先考虑女性。本文考察了这场辩论的双方,以回答一个基本的伦理和政策问题:“女性是否有理由必须保留对生育的控制权,而不仅仅是对自己身体的控制权?”
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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