Literature DB >> 24357074

Making sense of child welfare when regulating human reproductive technologies.

John McMillan1.   

Abstract

Policy-makers have attempted to frame the ethical requirements that are relevant to the creation of human beings via reproductive technologies. Various reports and laws enacted in New Zealand, Canada, Australia, and Britain have introduced tests for how we should weigh child welfare when using these technologies. A number of bioethicists have argued that child welfare should be interpreted as a "best interests" test. Others have argued that there are ethical reasons why we should abandon this kind of test. I will argue that at least some of the relevant policy can be interpreted as requiring those wishing to exercise their procreative liberty to have a reasonable plan to care and nurture any resulting child, thereby respecting the internal preconditions of that liberty. This interpretation of child welfare requirements answers some of the ethical worries about a child welfare test.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24357074     DOI: 10.1007/s11673-013-9495-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bioeth Inq        ISSN: 1176-7529            Impact factor:   1.352


  8 in total

1.  Why sex selection should be legal.

Authors:  D McCarthy
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 2.903

2.  AIDS and confidentiality.

Authors:  Grant Gillett
Journal:  J Appl Philos       Date:  1987-03

3.  Harming future people.

Authors:  Matthew Hanser
Journal:  Philos Public Aff       Date:  1990

4.  Wrongful life.

Authors:  David Archard
Journal:  Philosophy       Date:  2004

5.  Surrogacy: review for the UK Health Ministers of current arrangements for payments and regulation.

Authors:  M Brazier; S Golombok; A Campbell
Journal:  Hum Reprod Update       Date:  1997 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 15.610

6.  The logical case for "wrongful life".

Authors:  B Steinbock
Journal:  Hastings Cent Rep       Date:  1986-04       Impact factor: 2.683

7.  The welfare of the child.

Authors:  J Harris
Journal:  Health Care Anal       Date:  2000

8.  Procreative beneficence: why we should select the best children.

Authors:  J Savulescu
Journal:  Bioethics       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 1.898

  8 in total
  2 in total

1.  Two deaths and a birth: reminiscing and rehashing principles in biomedical ethics.

Authors:  Michael A Ashby; Leigh E Rich
Journal:  J Bioeth Inq       Date:  2014-03-20       Impact factor: 1.352

Review 2.  Open-Identity Sperm Donation: How Does Offering Donor-Identifying Information Relate to Donor-Conceived Offspring's Wishes and Needs?

Authors:  An Ravelingien; Veerle Provoost; Guido Pennings
Journal:  J Bioeth Inq       Date:  2014-07-05       Impact factor: 1.352

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.