Abstract
Kendal addresses some of the leadingfeminist concerns regarding assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs), including that they are potentially coercive for infertile women. This chapter also discusses pregnancy discrimination, abortion, fetal rights and disability discrimination, ultimately concluding that none of these concerns represents an insurmountable obstacle for the ethical pursuit of ectogenesis research.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Gerald Dworkin, ‘Is More Choice Better than Less?’ in Ethical Principles for Social Policy, ed. John Howie (Carbondale: South Illinois University Press, 1983 ), 79.
Nina G. Golden, ‘Pregnancy and Maternity Leave: Taking Baby Steps towards Effective Policies,’ Journal of Law and Family Studies 8 (2008): 1.
Paula McDonald, et al., ‘Expecting the Worst: Circumstances Surrounding Pregnancy Discrimination at Work and Progress to Formal Redress,’ Industrial Relations Journal 39, no. 3 (2008): 229.
Heather Boushey, ‘The Role of Government in Work-Family Conflict,’ The Future of Children 21, no. 2 (2011): 170.
Martha E. Gimenez, ‘The Mode of Reproduction: A Marxist-Feminist Analysis of the Effects of Reproductive Technologies,’ Gender and Society 5, no. 3 (1991): 337.
S. Oliver, et al., ‘Informed Choice for Users of Health Services: Views on Ultrasonography Leaflets of Women in Early Pregnancy, Midwives, and Ultrasonographers,’ British Medical Journal 313, no. 7067 (1996): 1252.
Richard Johanson, et al., ‘Has the Medicalization of Childbirth Gone Too Far?’ British Medical Journal 324, no. 7342 (2002): 892.
Elizabeth Heitman, ‘Social and Ethical Implications of In Vitro Fertilization,’ International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 15, no. 1 (1999): 24.
Lori B. Andrews, ‘My Body, My Property,’ The Hastings Center Report 16, no. 5 (1986): 34.
Nombuso Shabalala, ‘A New World Court to Judge Gender-Based War Crimes,’ Agenda: Empowering Women for Gender Equity 52 (2002): 89.
Steven L. Ross, ‘Abortion and the Death of the Fetus,’ Philosophy and Public Affairs 11, no. 3 (1982): 234.
D. Isaacs, ‘Moral Status of the Fetus: Fetal Rights of Maternal Autonomy?’ Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health 39, no. 1 (2003): 58–9.
Helena Anolak, ‘Our Bodies, Our Choices: Australian Law on Foetal Personhood,’ Women and Birth 28, no. 1 (2015): 60–4.
Peter Singer, ‘Technology and Procreation: How Far Should We Go?’ Technology Review 88 (1985): 22–30.
Nozomi Ishii, et al., ‘Outcomes of Infants Born at 22 and 23 Weeks’ Gestation,’ Pediatrics 132, no, 1 (2013): 62–71.
F.P. Biervliet, et al., ‘Induction of Lactation in the Intended Mother of a Surrogate Pregnancy: Case Report,’ Human Reproduction 16, no. 3 (2000): 581.
C. Cameron and R. Williamson, ‘Is There an Ethical Difference between Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis and Abortion?’ Journal of Medical Ethics 29, no. 2 (2003): 90–1.
Lynn Gillam, ‘Prenatal Diagnosis and Discrimination against the Disabled,’ Journal of Medical Ethics 25, no. 2 (1999): 163–4.
Jeff McMahan, ‘Causing Disabled People to Exist and Causing People to Be Disabled,’ Ethics 116, no. 1 (2005): 82.
John Harris, ‘One Principle and Three Fallacies of Disability Studies,’ Journal of Medical Ethics 27, no. 6 (2001): 386.
Joseph Losco and Mark Shublak, ‘Paternal-Fetal Conflict: An Examination of Paternal Responsibilities to the Fetus,’ Politics and the Life Sciences 13, no. 1 (1994): 63.
Julian Savulescu, ‘Procreative Beneficence: Why We Should Select the Best Children,’ Bioethics 15, no. 5–6 (2001): 413.
Alexander D. Wolfe, ‘Wrongful Selection: Assisted Reproductive Technologies, Intentional Diminishment, and the Procreative Right,’ Thomas M. Cooley Law Review 25, no. 3 (2008): 479–80.
Barbara Katz Rothman, The Tentative Pregnancy: How Amniocentesis Changes the Experience of Motherhood ( New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1993 ), 86.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2015 Evie Kendal
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kendal, E. (2015). Protecting Equal Opportunity from Ectogenesis. In: Equal Opportunity and the Case for State Sponsored Ectogenesis. Palgrave Pivot, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137549877_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137549877_4
Publisher Name: Palgrave Pivot, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-55985-5
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-54987-7
eBook Packages: Palgrave Religion & Philosophy CollectionPhilosophy and Religion (R0)