From Reproductive Responsibility to Reproductive Autonomy

  • Diane Paul
Part of the Philosophy and Medicine book series (PHME, volume 75)


That procreation is a basic human right, with which the state has no business meddling, is today the dominant view among Western genetics professionals, bioethicists, and journalists. In their perspective, reproductive genetic services should aim at increasing the choices available to women. Since no reproductive choice is right or wrong, clinicians should be scrupulously neutral in their dealings with clients. Any other approach constitutes “eugenics.”


Genetic Counseling Genetic Service Reproductive Responsibility Reproductive Choice Genetic Professional 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Andrews, G.R., Signs of Eugenic Progress. American Eugenics Society, 1935.Google Scholar
  2. Andrews, L. et al. Assessing Genetic Risks: Implications for Health and Social Policy. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1994.Google Scholar
  3. Anonymous. Talk show flap. Los Angeles Times 1991a; Dec. 31:B6Google Scholar
  4. Anonymous. Official defends station’s show on disabled. New York Times 1991b; Dec. 15:33Google Scholar
  5. Anonymous. New Chinese law on maternal and infant health care. Population and Development Review 1995; 21:698–702CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baden P.L. Encouraging equality: disabled anchor wins award from Courage Center. Star Tribune 1992; June 6:1BGoogle Scholar
  7. Beauchamp, T., Childress, J., Principles of Biomedical Ethics, 1st ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 1979.Google Scholar
  8. Berelson B. Beyond family planning. Science 1969; 163(1 February):533–543PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bird, C., The Myth of Liberal Individualism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.Google Scholar
  10. Bloche, M.G. “Clinical Counseling and the Problem of Autonomy-Negating Influence.” In HIV, AIDS &Childbearing: Public Policy, Private Lives, R.R. Faden, N.E. Kass, eds. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.Google Scholar
  11. Boulding, K., The Meaning of the 20th Century. New York: Harper and Row, 1964.Google Scholar
  12. Bussiere, E., (Dis)entitling the Poor: The Warren Court, Welfare Rights,and the American Political Tradition. University Park, PA: Penn State University Press, 1997.Google Scholar
  13. Chadwick R.F., What counts as success in genetic counseling? Journal of Medical Ethics 1993; 19:43–46PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Coughlan A., Perfect People’s Republic. New Scientist 1998; 160(24 Oct.):18Google Scholar
  15. Davies, S.P., Social Control of the Mentally Deficient. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell, 1930. Davis K. Population policy: will current programs succeed? Science 1967; 158:730–9Google Scholar
  16. Dikotter, F., Imperfect Conceptions: Medical Knowledge, Birth Defects, and Eugenics in China. New York: Columbia University Press, 1998.Google Scholar
  17. Di Stefano, C. “Autonomy in the Light of Difference.” In Revisioning the Political: Feminist Reconstructions of Traditional Concepts in Western Political Theory, N.J. Hirschmann, C. Di Stefano, eds. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1996.Google Scholar
  18. Dobzhansky, T., Mankind Evolving: The Evolution of the Human Species. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1962.Google Scholar
  19. Dong-Sheng, S., Popularizing the Knowledge of Eugenics and Advocating Optimal Births Vigorously. Renkou Yanjiu [Population Research]. Translation by M. Desilets and D. Vining, 1981. Available [Jan. 25, 2000] at:Google Scholar
  20. Dworetz, S.M., The Unvarnished Doctrine: Locke,Liberalism, and the American Revolution. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1994.Google Scholar
  21. Ehrlich, P.R., The Population Bomb. New York: Ballantine, 1968.Google Scholar
  22. Eisenberg L. Genetics and the survival of the unfit. Harper’s Magazine 1966; Feb.:53–8Google Scholar
  23. Faden, R., ed., The Human Radiation Experiments: Final Report of the President’s Advisory Committee. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.Google Scholar
  24. Fleming D., On living in a biological revolution. Atlantic Monthly 1969; 223:64–70Google Scholar
  25. Fletcher, J.F. “Knowledge, Risk, and the Right to Reproduce: A Limiting Principle.” In Genetics and the Law II, A. Milunsky, G.J. Annas, eds. New York: Plenum Press, 1980.Google Scholar
  26. Fox, R.C. “The Entry of U.S. Bioethics into the 1990s.” In A Matter of Principles? Ferment in U.S. Bioethics, E.R. DuBose, R.P. Hamel, L.J. O’Connell, eds. Valley Forge, PA: Trinity Press International, 1994.Google Scholar
  27. Glass B,. Science: endless horizons or golden age. Science 1971; 171(8 January):23–29PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gordon, L., Woman’s Body, Woman’s Right: Birth Control in America,Revised ed. New York: Penguin Books, 1990.Google Scholar
  29. Greenstone, D., The Lincoln Persuasion: Remaking American Liberalism. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993.Google Scholar
  30. Hardin G. The tragedy of the commons. Science 1968; 162(13 December):1243–1248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hubbard, R., Wald, E., Exploding the Gene Myth. Boston: Beacon Press, 1993.Google Scholar
  32. Jennings, B. “Autonomy and Difference: The Travails of Liberalism in Bioethics.” In Bioethics and Society: Constructing the Ethical Enterprise, R. DeVries, J. Subedi, eds. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1998.Google Scholar
  33. Jonsen, A.R., The Birth of Bioethics. New York: Oxford University Press, 1998.Google Scholar
  34. Kay, L.E., The Molecular Vision of Life. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993.Google Scholar
  35. Kevles, D.J., In the Name of Eugenics: Genetics and the Uses of Human Heredity. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1986.Google Scholar
  36. Lederberg, J. “Biological Future of Man.” In Man and His Future, G. Wolstenholme, ed. Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1963.Google Scholar
  37. Lepicard F. Eugenics and Roman Catholicism: an encyclical letter in context: Casti Connubi, December 31, 1930. Science in Context 1998; 11:527–44Google Scholar
  38. Ludmerer, KM., Genetics and American Society: A Historical Appraisal. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1972.Google Scholar
  39. Mao X. Chinese geneticists’ views of ethical issues in genetic testing and screening: evidence for eugenics in China. American Journal of Human Genetics 1998; 63:688–695PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mathews J. The debate over her baby: Bree Walker Lampley has a deformity. Some people think she shouldn’t have kids. Washington Post 1991; Oct. 20:F1Google Scholar
  41. Mathieu, D., Preventing Prenatal Harm: Should the State Intervene? 2nd ed. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 1996.Google Scholar
  42. Medawar, P. “Eugenics.” In The Life Science: Current Ideas of Biology, P.B. Medawar, J.C. Medawar, eds. New York: Harper and Row, 1977.Google Scholar
  43. Montagu, A., Human Heredity. Cleveland: World Publishing, 1959.Google Scholar
  44. Muller H.J. Our load of mutations. American Journal of Human Genetics 1950; 2:111–176PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Murray, T.H., The Worth of a Child. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1996.Google Scholar
  46. Nelkin, D., Lindee, M.S., The DNA Mystique: The Gene as Cultural Icon. New York: W.H. Freeman, 1995.Google Scholar
  47. Nie J-B. The myth of the Chinese culture, the myth of the Chinese medical ethics. Bioethics Examiner 1999; 3:1–2, 5–6Google Scholar
  48. Nussbaum, M., Cultivating Humanity. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1997.Google Scholar
  49. Otsubo S., Bartholomew J.R. Eugenics in Japan: some ironies of modernity, 1883–1945. Science in Context 1998; 11:545–565PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Packard, V., The People Shapers. Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1977.Google Scholar
  51. Paul D.B. Our load of mutations ‘revisited.’ Journal of the History of Biology 1987; 20:321–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Paul, D.B., Controlling Human Heredity: 1865 to the Present. New York: Prometheus Press, 1995.Google Scholar
  53. Paul D.B., Genetic services, economics and eugenics. Science in Context 1998; 11:481–489PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Paul D.B., Spencer H. The hidden science of eugenics. Nature 1995; 374:302–304PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Pauling L. Reflections on the new biology: foreword. UCLA Law Review 1968; 15:267–272Google Scholar
  56. Pius XI, Pius XI On Christian Marriage, The English Translation. New York: Barry Vail Corporation, 1931.Google Scholar
  57. Pius XII. Discourse of his Holiness Pope Pius XII to the International Congress on Blood Transfusion; 1958 Sept. 5. Reprinted in the Dight Institute Bulletin 1959; 11Google Scholar
  58. Pomfret J. China clarifies its law on sterilization. Washington Post 1998; Aug. 18:10Google Scholar
  59. Porter, I.H. “Evolution of Genetic Counseling in America.” In Genetic Counseling, H.A. Lubs, F. de la Cruz, eds. New York: Raven Press, 1977.Google Scholar
  60. Purdy, L. “Loving Future People.” In Reproduction, Ethics, and the Law: Feminist Perspectives, J.C. Callahan, ed. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1995.Google Scholar
  61. Rabinow, P. Life: dignity and value. Proceedings of Postgenomics? Historical, Techno Epistemic, and Cultural Aspects of Genome Projects sponsored by Max-Planck-Institute for the History of Science; 1998 July 8–11; Berlin.Google Scholar
  62. Ramsey, P., Fabricated Man: The Ethics of Genetic Control. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1970.Google Scholar
  63. Reed, S., Parenthood and Heredity. New York: John Wiley, 1964.Google Scholar
  64. Rosenthal E. Scientists debate China’s law on sterilizing the carriers of genetic defects. New York Times 1998; Aug. 16:14Google Scholar
  65. Sandel, M.J., Democracy’s Discontent: America in Search of a Public Philosophy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1996.Google Scholar
  66. Schneider, C.E., The Practice of Autonomy: Patients,Doctors, and Medical Decisions. New York: Oxford University Press, 1998.Google Scholar
  67. Seligmann J. Whose baby is it, anyway? Newsweek 1991; 118(18):73Google Scholar
  68. Shain, B.A., The Myth of American Individualism: Protestant Origins of American Political Thought. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994.Google Scholar
  69. Sonneborn, T.M., ed., Control of Human Heredity and Evolution. New York: Macmillan, 1965.Google Scholar
  70. Sorenson, J.R., Culbert, A.J. “Genetic Counselors and Counseling Orientation: Unexamined Topics in Evaluation.” In Genetic Counseling, H.A. Lubs, F. de la Cruz, eds. New York: Raven Press, 1974.Google Scholar
  71. Steinbock B., McClamrock R., When is birth unfair to the child? Hastings Center Report 1994; 24:15–21PubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. Sunstein, C.R., Free Markets and Social Justice. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997.Google Scholar
  73. Wertz D.C., Society and the not-so-new genetics: what are we afraid of? Some future predictions from a social scientist. Journal of Contemporary Law and Policy 1997a; 13:299–346Google Scholar
  74. Wertz D.C. Proceedings of the Van Leer Institute, Jerusalem sponsored by the Workshop on Eugenic Thought and Practice: A reappraisal towards the end of the twentieth century; May 26–29; Published in part as Eugenics is alive and well: a survey of genetics professionals around the world. Science in Context 1997b; 11:493–510Google Scholar
  75. Wertz, D.C. “International Research in Bioethics: The Challenges of Cross-Cultural Interpretation.” In Bioethics and Society: Constructing the Ethical Enterprise, R. DeVries, J. Subedi, eds. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1998.Google Scholar
  76. Wolf, S.M. “Introduction: Gender and Feminism in Bioethics.” In Feminism and Bioethics: Beyond Reproduction, S.M. Wolf, ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.Google Scholar
  77. Wolpe, P.R. “The Triumph of Autonomy in American Bioethics: A Sociological View.” In Bioethics and Society: Constructing the Ethical Enterprise, R. DeVries, J. Subedi, eds. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1998.Google Scholar
  78. Wolpe, P.R., McGee, G. “Expert Bioethics’ as Professional Discourse: The Case of Stem Cells.” In Beyond Cloning: Embryos,Ethics, and Immortality, S. Holland, K. Lebaczq, L. Zoloth, eds. Cambridge: MIT Press, in press.Google Scholar
  79. Wolstenhohne, G., ed., “Eugenics and Genetics: Discussion.” In Man and His Future. Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1963.Google Scholar
  80. Wright, S., Molecular Politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Diane Paul
    • 1
  1. 1.University of MassachusettsBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations