Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Assisted reproduction bioethics
Assisted reproduction bioethics
Assisted reproduction bioethics
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Ethical issues on Reproductive technology
Ethics is the matter of the heart and when we discuss the heart we will all ways have conflict. Just for the simple fact that ethics in dealing with assisted reproductive technology is like a domino effect, when you answer one question another one arises. When we bring up the law in the United States about marital status and assisted reproductive technology (ART) you must be in a stable relationship, but what I found interesting is they have yet to define a couple, the relationship. Legislation does not allow discretion or the possibility that it was used, there is no grey area. Who qualifies; infertile couples, only married couples, gay couples, lesbian couples, HIV-positive couples what about the 60 year old couple that wants a baby. We are forgetting the single women who want babies also, who made up the rule that if you’re single you can not raise a child as well as a married couple. When bringing up people, we will naturally bring up autonomy.
Autonomy and how much of it is right by law. Autonomy is the right to self-government, moral principles we set up for ourselves. What about the respect for the patient’s autonomy? What about the patient’s right to choose what she or the couple sees fit. For example a wife would like to be implanted with six embryos. While the doctor may say that it is an unsafe venture, the couple feels that it is their bodies, lives and choice who is the physician to decide the suitable number for them. When we start to discuss embryos we bring up more issues in dealing with donor anonymity, alternative sources of donor eggs and arguments against and for donation.
Donation is a very tender subject, because in nature’s way of doing things in having plain sexual intercourse we left the baby’s characteristics up to chance where as in technology we can do so many things to alter, exploit and to ultimately pick and choose the design of our child. I don’t know how to say in words parents are suppose to love unconditionally no matter if the child came out with brown eyes and you wanted green. While ethics argues for justice and reproductive tourism, which basically states if I don’t qualify in the United States I should be able to travel to Canada to get the procedure done or the donation come from Canada.
Autonomy is a concept found in moral, political, and bioethical reasoning. Inside these connections, it is the limit of a sound individual to make an educated, unpressured decision. Patient autonomy can conflict with clinician autonomy and, in such a clash of values, it is not obvious which should prevail. (Lantos, Matlock & Wendler, 2011). In order to gain informed consent, a patient
Beauchamp and Childress (2012) defined autonomy as self-ruled, self governance or self determination. John Peter Smith hospital did not respect the advance wishes of Mrs. Munoz. Although Marlise did not have a formal advance directive Mr. Munoz, her surrogate, continued to advocate her wishes . Mrs. Munoz right to autonomy
A person's individuality begins at conception and develops throughout life. These natural developments can now be changed through genetically engineering a human embryo. Through this process, gender, eye and hair color, height, medical disorders, and many more qualities can be changed. I believe genetically engineering a human embryo is corrupt because it is morally unacceptable, violates the child's rights, and creates an even more divided society.
It is said that “Some agree with Pope John Paul II that the selling of organs is morally wrong and violates “the dignity of the human person” (qtd. In Finkel 26), but this is a belief professed by healthy and affluent individuals” (158). MacKay is using ethos the show the morality of those that believe it is wrong for organ sales. The morals shown are those of people who have yet to experience a situation of needing a new organ. Having a healthy and wealthy lifestyle, they cannot relate to those that have trouble with money and a unhealthy lifestyle as the poor. The poor and the middle class are the ones that suffer being last on the list for a transplant, thus have different ethics. Paying an absurd amount of money and still having to be at the bottom of the list for a transplant, is something no person anywhere in the world should have to
Our culture has a stringent belief that creating new life if a beautiful process which should be cherished. Most often, the birth process is without complications and the results are a healthy active child. In retrospect, many individuals feel that there are circumstances that make it morally wrong to bring a child into the world. This is most often the case when reproduction results in the existence of another human being with a considerably reduced chance at a quality life. To delve even further into the topic, there are individuals that feel they have been morally wronged by the conception in itself. Wrongful conception is a topic of debate among many who question the ethical principles involved with the sanctity of human life. This paper will analyze the ethical dilemmas of human dignity, compassion, non-malfeasance, and social justice, as well the legal issues associated with wrongful conception.
Couples experiencing infertility issues now have a number of options at their disposal from in-vitro fertilization to intrauterine insemination or going as far as using a surrogate and donor eggs or donor sperm. Technology has made it possible for someone to experience the joy of parenthood regardless of whether they can naturally conceive children. All of these procedures come with their own ethical questions and pros and cons. One of the biggest moral dilemmas is what to do with the left-over embryos still in storage when a family has decided they have had enough children. Most couples see this ethical quandary because they recognize that the embryos are whole human beings and do not think it is morally right to dispose
No other element of the Women’s Rights Movement has generated as much controversy as the debate over reproductive rights. As the movement gained momentum so did the demand for birth control, sex education, family planning and the repeal of all abortion laws. On January 22, 1973 the Supreme Court handed down the Roe v. Wade decision which declared abortion "fundamental right.” The ruling recognized the right of the individual “to be free from unwanted governmental intrusion into matters so fundamentally affecting a person as the right of a woman to decide whether or not to terminate her pregnancy.” (US Supreme Court, 1973) This federal-level ruling took effect, legalizing abortion for all women nationwide.
As women, it is important to remember that the reproductive freedoms we now have can be easily taken away. Some people take for granted the accessibility to birth control, condoms, and abortion. President Bush has initiated policies since coming into office that threaten women’s choices. As the Bush administration takes over, it is important for women and men to come together to support women’s rights. “Bush is setting a tone for anti-choice legislation, so I expect that any legislator who is anti-choice will put something in this year,” said Jessica Morgan, president of the Baltimore chapter of the National Organization for Women (Koenig, B2). Legislative, executive, and judicial action can very possibly come together during this administration to limit or eliminate women’s reproductive freedom.
...red. The basis of IVF, surrogate motherhood and sundry practices is allergic to morality. Further developments would only inspire other immoralities. We have to make them a tough procedure to follow. We need to construct an order before crises impose one as a necessity. By then many waters of life may have passed irrevocably under the bridge.
Imagine a parent walking into what looks like a conference room. A sheet of paper waits on a table with numerous questions many people wish they had control over. Options such as hair color, skin color, personality traits and other physical appearances are mapped out across the page. When the questions are filled out, a baby appears as he or she was described moments before. The baby is the picture of health, and looks perfect in every way. This scenario seems only to exist in a dream, however, the option to design a child has already become a reality in the near future. Parents may approach a similar scenario every day in the future as if choosing a child’s characteristics were a normal way of life. The use of genetic engineering should not give parents the choice to design their child because of the act of humans belittling and “playing” God, the ethics involved in interfering with human lives, and the dangers of manipulating human genes.
In our society, there are many ethical dilemmas that we are faced with that are virtually impossible to solve. One of the most difficult and controversial issues that we are faced with is abortion. There are many strong arguments both for and against the right to have an abortion which are so complicated that it becomes impossible to resolve. The complexity of this issue lies in the different aspects of the argument. The essence of a person, rights, and who is entitled to these rights, are a few of the many aspects which are very difficult to define. There are also issues of what circumstances would justify abortion. Because the issue of abortion is virtually impossible to solve, all one can hope to do is understand the different aspects of the argument so that if he or she is faced with that issue in their own lives, they would be able to make educated and thoughtful decisions in dealing with it.
At first glance, assisted procreation practices do not necessarily violate a child’s right to identity. The violation lies in the fact that the state is not taking a serious enough stance on regulating the issues that emerge from assisted procreation technologies. The state is voluntarily removing its responsibilities in regulating this field by allowing cases of donor confusion, the implantation of too many embryos and the disorganization of donor files. Instead of imposing criminal sanctions or punishments, the state is too often turning a blind eye.
In 2000 the United Nations Populations Fund (UNFPA) defined reproductive rights as "the basic rights of couples and individuals to decide freely and responsibly the number, spacing and timing of their children; to have the information and means to do so; and to have the right to make decisions concerning reproduction, free of discrimination, coercion or violence."[1] Traditionally society defines reproductive rights in the context of one's being able to make decisions about his or her own reproduction; other individuals, unrelated to that person, were not considered as being involved in the decision. With the onset of in vitro fertilization (IVF) in 1978, reproductive processes have become more complicated. For example, in gestational surrogacy a surrogate mother, not genetically related to the embryo, is brought into the process of reproduction. This technique allows infertile couples to carry a child or children in the womb of a carrier, rather than in the womb of the biological mother.[2] As a result of this ethically controversial technology, society must modify its reproductive rights. In vitro fertilization (IVF) alone will not solve people's reproductive problems and protect everybody's rights. Society, therefore, must distinguish whose rights-the rights of biological parents or those of the surrogate mothers-should be protected.
Abortion may appear ethical or unethical depending on various viewpoints and circumstances. The fetus is considered a person and bringing it to term may be unethical as the act is considered as murder. In some situations, the mother may require to terminate a pregnancy for her bodily autonomy (Johnston, 2003). In such positions, the resolution to terminate a pregnancy may be argued as the most ethical choice. The mother is also considered to having a reasonable level of ethical responsibility to the fetus, because she did not take enough precaution to ensure avoiding conception (Cline, 2014). The mother’s ethical responsibility to the fetus may not be enough to deprive her choice of abortion; it...
Because of how the cells are acquired, they cross lines with the issue over abortion, in vitro fertilization, and whether or not an embryo is considered a “human” and if it should be held to the same morals. The stake over the issue of stem cells revolves around the human life itself. Proponents of stem cells say that until an embryo has not been embedded into the uterus, it does not have a human status and therefore could be used to treat patient who already are persons. They also propose to obtain cells through IVF as opposed to abortion because abortion is attributed to a deliberate act of killing human life while the fo...