制造,而不是开始:试管婴儿和条件下的生命权。

IF 0.4 Q4 MEDICAL ETHICS
Linacre Quarterly Pub Date : 2022-11-01 Epub Date: 2022-10-18 DOI:10.1177/00243639221116160
Susanne Kummer
{"title":"制造,而不是开始:试管婴儿和条件下的生命权。","authors":"Susanne Kummer","doi":"10.1177/00243639221116160","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In a society in which the decoupling of sexuality and human reproduction has become normal, In vitro fertilization (IVF) has mutated into a kind of standard procedure. There is little awareness of the ethical ruptures that the mechanization of human reproduction causes. The basic ethical problem with extracorporeal fertilization in a test tube is that a child is not conceived through the personal union of a man and a woman, but is \"produced\" in a laboratory. In the context of human creation, this entails a series of ethical problems. The technique does not merely offer another possible option for action, but it leads to a fundamental change in the attitude towards human life as such. A look at the history of assisted reproductive technology (ART) since the 1970s reveals that ethical problems, eugenic visions as well as medical experiments on humans have been inherent to the method from the very beginning. Considering that eugenic thinking has been a driving force from the very beginning it astonishes that this delicate point has hardly been recognized and highlighted so far. Robert Edwards' (1925-2013) vision went far beyond the mere treatment of infertility through the use of IVF, which he saw as enabling the selection of so-called \"unhealthy life.\" The article considers the risks of IVF and includes recent studies by physicians involved in reproductive medicine who are increasingly critical of their industry. Furthermore it emphasizes the core ethical question on human reproductive technology, contrasting the \"ethics of procreation\" with the \"ethics of production.\"</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>The article highlights historical aspects, considers the risks as well as the ethical questions on assisted reproductive technology.</p>","PeriodicalId":44238,"journal":{"name":"Linacre Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9743029/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Made, Not Begotten: IVF and the Right to Life Under Conditions.\",\"authors\":\"Susanne Kummer\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00243639221116160\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In a society in which the decoupling of sexuality and human reproduction has become normal, In vitro fertilization (IVF) has mutated into a kind of standard procedure. There is little awareness of the ethical ruptures that the mechanization of human reproduction causes. The basic ethical problem with extracorporeal fertilization in a test tube is that a child is not conceived through the personal union of a man and a woman, but is \\\"produced\\\" in a laboratory. In the context of human creation, this entails a series of ethical problems. The technique does not merely offer another possible option for action, but it leads to a fundamental change in the attitude towards human life as such. A look at the history of assisted reproductive technology (ART) since the 1970s reveals that ethical problems, eugenic visions as well as medical experiments on humans have been inherent to the method from the very beginning. Considering that eugenic thinking has been a driving force from the very beginning it astonishes that this delicate point has hardly been recognized and highlighted so far. Robert Edwards' (1925-2013) vision went far beyond the mere treatment of infertility through the use of IVF, which he saw as enabling the selection of so-called \\\"unhealthy life.\\\" The article considers the risks of IVF and includes recent studies by physicians involved in reproductive medicine who are increasingly critical of their industry. Furthermore it emphasizes the core ethical question on human reproductive technology, contrasting the \\\"ethics of procreation\\\" with the \\\"ethics of production.\\\"</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>The article highlights historical aspects, considers the risks as well as the ethical questions on assisted reproductive technology.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":44238,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Linacre Quarterly\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9743029/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Linacre Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00243639221116160\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/10/18 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICAL ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Linacre Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00243639221116160","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/10/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICAL ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在一个性行为和人类生殖脱钩已成为常态的社会中,体外受精(IVF)已成为一种标准程序。人们很少意识到人类繁殖的机械化导致的伦理破裂。试管体外受精的基本伦理问题是,孩子不是通过男女的个人结合受孕的,而是在实验室中“生产”的。在人类创造的背景下,这涉及到一系列伦理问题。这项技术不仅提供了另一种可能的行动选择,而且导致了对人类生活态度的根本改变。回顾20世纪70年代以来辅助生殖技术(ART)的历史,可以发现伦理问题、优生学愿景以及对人类的医学实验从一开始就是该方法固有的。考虑到优生学思维从一开始就是一种驱动力,令人惊讶的是,到目前为止,这一微妙的观点几乎没有得到承认和强调。罗伯特·爱德华兹(Robert Edwards,1925-2013)的愿景远远超出了通过试管婴儿治疗不孕不育的范畴,他认为试管婴儿可以选择所谓的“不健康的生活”。这篇文章考虑了试管婴儿的风险,并包括了参与生殖医学的医生最近的研究,他们对自己的行业越来越持批评态度。文章还强调了人类生殖技术的核心伦理问题,将“生育伦理”与“生产伦理”进行了对比。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Made, Not Begotten: IVF and the Right to Life Under Conditions.

In a society in which the decoupling of sexuality and human reproduction has become normal, In vitro fertilization (IVF) has mutated into a kind of standard procedure. There is little awareness of the ethical ruptures that the mechanization of human reproduction causes. The basic ethical problem with extracorporeal fertilization in a test tube is that a child is not conceived through the personal union of a man and a woman, but is "produced" in a laboratory. In the context of human creation, this entails a series of ethical problems. The technique does not merely offer another possible option for action, but it leads to a fundamental change in the attitude towards human life as such. A look at the history of assisted reproductive technology (ART) since the 1970s reveals that ethical problems, eugenic visions as well as medical experiments on humans have been inherent to the method from the very beginning. Considering that eugenic thinking has been a driving force from the very beginning it astonishes that this delicate point has hardly been recognized and highlighted so far. Robert Edwards' (1925-2013) vision went far beyond the mere treatment of infertility through the use of IVF, which he saw as enabling the selection of so-called "unhealthy life." The article considers the risks of IVF and includes recent studies by physicians involved in reproductive medicine who are increasingly critical of their industry. Furthermore it emphasizes the core ethical question on human reproductive technology, contrasting the "ethics of procreation" with the "ethics of production."

Summary: The article highlights historical aspects, considers the risks as well as the ethical questions on assisted reproductive technology.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Linacre Quarterly
Linacre Quarterly MEDICAL ETHICS-
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
40.00%
发文量
57
×
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