Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 209
Filter
1.
Rev. derecho genoma hum ; (59): 189-229, jul.-dic. 2023.
Article in English | IBECS | ID: ibc-232454

ABSTRACT

Para garantizar la igualdad real, la autonomía, la libertad y el derecho a la autodeterminación reproductiva, es imperativo que los estados aseguren el derecho a determinar libre y responsablemente el número deseado de hijos. La penalización total del aborto es incompatible con los sistemas jurídicos constitucionales, ya que ignora la garantía de protección de los derechos humanos, imponiendo una carga injusta e indefendible a las mujeres vulnerables. Este artículo examina los elementos que sustentan un enfoque jurídico restrictivo de los derechos reproductivos. Se centra en las nociones cruciales de autonomía reproductiva y autodeterminación y su lugar en el marco de los derechos reproductivos. Estos derechos se consideran derechos humanos y se delimitan las correspondientes responsabilidades de los Estados. (AU)


To ensure genuine equality, autonomy, freedom, and the right to reproductive self-determination, it is imperative for nations to ensure the right to freely and responsibly determine the desired number of children. The complete criminalization of abortion is incompatible with constitutional legal systems as it ignores the assurance of human rights protection, placing an unfair and indefensible burden on vulnerable women. This article examines the elements upholding a legal approach that restricts reproductive rights. It centers on the crucial notions of reproductive autonomy and self-determination and their place in the reproductive rights framework. These rights are regarded as human rights, outlining States’ corresponding responsibilities. (AU)


Subject(s)
Humans , Abortion , Human Rights/legislation & jurisprudence , Reproduction/ethics
3.
Ceska Gynekol ; 88(3): 190-199, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37344185

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The paper explores the links between sustainability, population and reproductive ethics, because sustainability goals and population matters both imply ethical commitments. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This article is based on a critical analysis of current scientific and philosophical literature on sustainability, population and reproductive ethics. RESULTS: The idea of sustainability, as enshrined in the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, is a concept whose goal is to protect the environment, strengthen human communities and foster prosperity; in other words, to create a world in which all can thrive and prosper. However, humanity is moving quickly in the opposite direction. The main causes of unsustainability are excessive human numbers and the excessive human economic activity to which they lead. Sustainability is achievable, but it requires a sustainable human population. According to the latest studies, that is somewhere around three billion humans. Reaching this goal requires targeting all four reachable roots of the population's growth. Supportive measures, such as voluntary family planning, education and empowerment, combat (1) unwanted fertility and (2) coerced fertility. However, (3) population momentum and (4) wanted fertility also must be addressed. CONCLUSION: The latter two can be approached through promotion of reproductive ethics of small families, ideally one-child families, as a new global ethical norm.


Subject(s)
Family Planning Services , Fertility , Reproduction , Humans , Reproduction/ethics , Sustainable Development , Contraception
4.
Monash Bioeth Rev ; 38(2): 197-204, 2020 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33175992

ABSTRACT

The potential benefits of an alternative to physical gestation are numerous. These include providing reproductive options for prospective parents who are unable to establish or maintain a physiological pregnancy, and saving the lives of some infants born prematurely. Ectogenesis could also promote sexual equality in reproduction, and represents a necessary option for women experiencing an unwanted pregnancy who are morally opposed to abortion. Despite these broad, and in some cases unique benefits, one major ethical concern is the potential impact of this emerging technology on abortion rights. This article will argue that ectogenesis poses a challenge to many common arguments in favour of a pregnant woman's right to choose, but only insomuch as it highlights that their underlying justifications for abortion are based on flawed conceptions of what the foetus and pregnancy actually are. By interrogating the various interests and relationships involved in a pregnancy, this article will demonstrate that the emergence of artificial gestation need not impact existing abortion rights or legislation, nor definitions of independent viability or moral status.


Subject(s)
Abortion, Induced/ethics , Ectogenesis/ethics , Moral Status , Reproduction/ethics , Reproductive Rights , Women's Rights , Biotechnology/ethics , Dissent and Disputes , Female , Fetus , Humans , Insemination , Male , Pregnancy
5.
BMC Womens Health ; 20(1): 234, 2020 10 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33059640

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Commercial surrogacy is a highly controversial issue that leads to heated debates in the feminist literature, especially when surrogacy takes place in developing countries and when it is performed by local women for wealthy international individuals. The objective of this article is to confront common assumptions with the narratives and experiences described by Indian surrogates themselves. METHODS: This qualitative study included 33 surrogates interviewed in India (Mumbai, Chennai and New Delhi) who were at different stages of the surrogacy process. They were recruited through five clinics and agencies. This 2-year field study was conducted before the 2018 surrogacy law. RESULTS: Surrogates met the criteria fixed by the national guidelines in terms of age and marital and family situation. The commitment to surrogacy had generally been decided with the husband. Its aim was above all to improve the socioeconomic condition of the family. Women described surrogacy as offering better conditions than their previous paid activity. They had clear views on the child and their work. However, they declared that they faced difficulties and social condemnation as surrogacy is associated with extra-marital relationships. They also described a medical process in which they had no autonomy although they did not express complaints. Overall, surrogates did not portray themselves as vulnerable women and victims, but rather as mothers and spouses taking control of their destiny. CONCLUSIONS: The reality of surrogacy in India embraces antagonistic features that we analyze in this paper as "paradoxes". First, while women have become surrogates in response to gender constraints as mothers and wives, yet in so doing they have gone against gender norms. Secondly, while surrogacy was socially perceived as dirty work undertaken in order to survive, surrogates used surrogacy as a means to upward mobility for themselves and their children. Finally, while surrogacy was organized to counteract accusations of exploitation, surrogates were under constant domination by the medical system and had no decision-making power in the surrogacy process. This echoes their daily life as women. Although the Indian legal framework has changed, surrogacy still challenges gender norms, particularly in other developing countries where the practice is emerging.


Subject(s)
Commerce/ethics , Decision Making/ethics , Reproduction/ethics , Reproductive Techniques, Assisted/economics , Child , Female , Fertilization in Vitro/economics , Fertilization in Vitro/legislation & jurisprudence , Humans , India , Interviews as Topic , Mothers , Pregnancy , Public Policy , Qualitative Research , Surrogate Mothers/psychology
6.
CRISPR J ; 3(1): 32-36, 2020 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32091250

ABSTRACT

If the safety and efficacy issues relating to heritable genome editing can be resolved, how should liberal democratic societies regulate the use of this technology by prospective parents who wish to effect edits to the genomes of their prospective children? We suggest that recent developments in South African law can be useful in this regard. The country's apex court recently recognized as a legal principle that the scope of possible reproductive decisions that parents may make when using new reproductive technologies excludes decisions that will cause harm to the prospective child-the principle of procreative non-maleficence. We suggest that the principle of procreative non-maleficence provides a mechanism for striking an equitable balance between two competing interests that are given legal recognition in most liberal democracies: the reproductive rights of prospective parents and the state's duty to protect child welfare.


Subject(s)
Gene Editing/ethics , Gene Editing/legislation & jurisprudence , Reproduction/ethics , CRISPR-Cas Systems/genetics , Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats/genetics , Gene Editing/methods , Genome, Human/genetics , Germ Cells/metabolism , Germ-Line Mutation/genetics , Humans , Reproduction/genetics , Reproductive Rights/ethics , Reproductive Techniques/trends , South Africa
7.
J Med Ethics ; 46(2): 93-98, 2020 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31537616

ABSTRACT

The contemporary philosophical literature on abortion primarily revolves around three seemingly intractable debates, concerning the (1) moral status of the fetus, (2) scope of women's rights and (3) moral relevance of the killing/letting die distinction. The possibility of ectogenesis-technology that would allow a fetus to develop outside of a gestational mother's womb-presents a unique opportunity for moral compromise. Here, I argue those opposed to abortion have a prima facie moral obligation to pursue ectogenesis technology and provide ectogenesis for disconnected fetuses as part of a moral compromise.


Subject(s)
Abortion, Induced/ethics , Dissent and Disputes , Ectogenesis/ethics , Personhood , Reproductive Techniques/ethics , Women's Rights , Abortion, Legal , Cooperative Behavior , Ethics , Female , Fetal Development , Fetus , Humans , Moral Obligations , Pregnancy , Reproduction/ethics , Social Values , Uterus
8.
J Med Ethics ; 46(2): 76-82, 2020 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31704782

ABSTRACT

The benefits of full ectogenesis, that is, the gestation of human fetuses outside the maternal womb, for women ground many contemporary authors' arguments on the ethical desirability of this practice. In this paper, I present and assess two sets of arguments advanced in favour of ectogenesis: arguments stressing ectogenesis' equality-promoting potential and arguments stressing its freedom-promoting potential. I argue that although successfully grounding a positive case for ectogenesis, these arguments have limitations in terms of their reach and scope. Concerning their limited reach, I contend that ectogenesis will likely benefit a small subset of women and, arguably, not the group who most need to achieve equality and freedom. Concerning their limited scope, I contend that these defences do not pay sufficient attention to the context in which ectogenesis would be developed and that, as a result, they risk leaving the status quo unchanged. After providing examples of these limitations, I move to my proposal concerning the role of ectogenesis in promoting women's equality and freedom. This proposal builds on Silvia Federici's, Mariarosa Dalla Costa's and Selma James' readings of the international feminist campaign 'Wages for Housework'. It maintains that the political perspective and provocation that ectogenesis can advance should be considered and defended.


Subject(s)
Dissent and Disputes , Ectogenesis/ethics , Freedom , Gender Equity , Reproductive Techniques/ethics , Women's Rights , Abortion, Induced/ethics , Ethics , Female , Fetal Development , Fetus , Humans , Parturition , Politics , Pregnancy , Reproduction/ethics , Uterus , Women
9.
J Insect Physiol ; 121: 104000, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31863762

ABSTRACT

Immunity and reproduction are physiologically demanding processes, therefore trade-offs are expected between these life history traits. Furthermore, investments in these traits are also known to be affected by factors such as sex, body size, individual condition, seasonal changes and parasite infection. The relationship between immunity and reproduction and the effect of other factors on this relationship were investigated in many species, but there are a small number of studies on these patterns in biparental invertebrates. Lethrus apterus is an iteroparous biparental beetle with predominant female care in respect of collecting and processing food for larvae. Males guard the nest built underground and also their mate. Here we investigate how sex, body size, time within the reproductive season and parasite load may influence the relationship between immunocompetence and reproductive investment in this species. In beetles from a natural population we quantified immune response by measuring the encapsulation response, antimicrobial activity of hemolymph, the investment into reproductive tissues by measuring the size of testis follicles in males and total egg size in females, and parasite load by counting the number of mites on the beetles. We found that the encapsulation response is condition-dependent, as large individuals showed significantly higher encapsulation ability than small ones. Antimicrobial capacity was significantly higher in females than in males. In case of antimicrobial activity there was also a seasonal change in the relationship between immunity and reproductive investment, but only under heavy mite load. Reproductive investment was influenced by the interaction between body size and season (in females) and by body size and season (in males). Furthermore in females the interaction between antimicrobial activity and season indicated that reproductive investment increased with antimicrobial activity early in the reproductive season. By investigating the relationship between immunity and reproductive investment in a natural population of a biparental beetle species, we can conclude that investments into these important life history traits are governed by complex interactions between physiological and environmental factors. Our results are discussed in the context of life history evolution, highlighting the role of the assessed factors in shaping trade-offs themselves (in invertebrates).


Subject(s)
Coleoptera/physiology , Immunity/physiology , Reproduction/ethics , Animals , Body Size , Environment , Female , Life History Traits , Male , Reproduction/physiology , Seasons , Sex Factors
10.
Bioethics ; 33(9): 1072-1082, 2019 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31489967

ABSTRACT

Given recent advancements in CRISPR-Cas9 powered genetic modification of gametes and embryos, both popular media and scientific articles are hailing CRISPR's life-saving, curative potential for people with serious monogenic diseases. But claims that CRISPR modification of gametes or embryos, a form of germline engineering, has therapeutic value are deeply mistaken. This article explains why reproductive uses of CRISPR, and germline engineering more generally, do not treat or save lives that would otherwise have a genetic disease. Reproductive uses of CRISPR create healthy people whose existence is not inevitable in the first place. Creating healthy lives has distinct and lesser moral value from saving or curing lives that would otherwise have genetic disease. The real value in reproductive uses of CRISPR is in helping a very limited population of people have healthy, genetically related children. This diminished value cannot compete with the concerns in opposition to germline engineering, nor is it worth the investment of research money.


Subject(s)
Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats , Genetic Engineering/ethics , Genetic Engineering/standards , Genetic Therapy/ethics , Genetic Therapy/standards , Reproduction/ethics , Dissent and Disputes , Female , Humans , Male
11.
Bioethics ; 33(9): 1029-1034, 2019 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31389034

ABSTRACT

According to an almost axiomatic standard in bioethics, moral commitment should ground parents' relationship with their children, rather than biogenetic relatedness. This standard has been used lately to express skepticism about extending existing assisted reproductive treatments (ARTs) to same-sex couples and to research into novel fertility interventions for those couples, but this skepticism is misplaced on several grounds. As a matter of access and equity, same-sex couples seem presumptively entitled to genetic relatedness to their children as far as possible both in regard to existing ARTs and to novel ARTs under investigation. For those worried about the effects of trying to secure biogenetic relatedness for same-sex couples, it may be noted that same-sex couples will only ever be a fraction of the parents implicated in propping up "biologism," as the expectation of biogenetic relatedness it is sometimes called. The cultural force of biologism would survive almost intact even if no same-sex couples were ever to have genetically related children. It is therefore hard to see why same-sex couples should forfeit aspirations to biogenetic relationships with their children or enjoy less subsidy for ARTs than the subsidy given to different-sex couples. As matter of moral consistency, the full implications of the biologism critique have yet to be evaluated relative to different-sex couples.


Subject(s)
Heredity , Homosexuality, Female/genetics , Homosexuality, Male/genetics , Parent-Child Relations , Parents/psychology , Reproduction/ethics , Adolescent , Adult , Bioethics , Child , Child, Preschool , Female , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Male
12.
New Bioeth ; 25(2): 153-171, 2019 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31130111

ABSTRACT

The successes of the human genome project and genomics research programs portend great potential to improve upon health and enhance life. As scientific advancements continue, bioethicists and policy makers deliberate over the social and ethical implications of genetic and genomic technologies and information (ggT/I). The application of ggT/I to human reproduction raises conceptual and moral questions about being human and the links between offspring, parents, and society. Given ggT/I's ability to significantly affect the biological constitution of humans and future human generations thinking through such issues is fundamental to ethical and policy analysis. By means of a systematic literature review and accompanying content analysis, this paper highlights the dominant ethical concerns raised within recent bioethics discourse over the use of ggT/I for human reproduction. Based on these findings it aso offers a framework through which, and demarcates where, religious perspectives can add value to genethics debates and policy deliberation.


Subject(s)
Genetic Research/ethics , Genetic Techniques/ethics , Genomics/ethics , Religion and Science , Reproduction/ethics , Humans , Moral Obligations
13.
Bioethics ; 33(1): 54-59, 2019 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30035327

ABSTRACT

We seek to develop a plausible conception of genetic parenthood, taking a recent discussion by Heidi Mertes as our point of departure. Mertes considers two conceptions of genetic parenthood-one invoking genetic resemblance and the other genetic inheritance-and presents counter-examples to both conceptions. We revise Mertes' second conception so as to avoid these and related counter-examples.


Subject(s)
Cloning, Organism , Germ Cells , Mitochondrial Replacement Therapy , Parents , Reproduction/genetics , Reproductive Techniques, Assisted , Stem Cells , Adult , Bioethical Issues , Child , Concept Formation , Fathers , Female , Humans , Inheritance Patterns , Male , Mothers , Nuclear Transfer Techniques , Reproduction/ethics , Reproductive Techniques, Assisted/ethics , Sequence Homology, Nucleic Acid , Stem Cell Research
14.
Bioethics ; 33(1): 82-90, 2019 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30106178

ABSTRACT

In recent years, progress in cancer treatment has greatly increased the chances of recovery. Yet, treatment may have irreversible effects on patients' fertility. In order to protect future fertility, preservation of ovarian tissue may be offered today even to very young girls, involving a surgical procedure that may be performed by minimally invasive laparoscopy, under general anesthesia. However, in the tragic event of a girl's death, questions may arise regarding the possible use of the preserved ovarian tissue by her parents. Should posthumous reproductive use of ovarian tissue without the girl's prior consent (due to her young age) be considered a violation of her rights? On the other hand, can it be argued that it is in the interest of a child who died young to leave a genetic trace through posthumous reproduction, because genetic continuity is in the interest of every human being? After presenting the relevant clinical facts, we explore the ethical dimensions of this possible practice through an analysis of the interests of the deceased, her parents, and the child that may be born posthumously.


Subject(s)
Cryopreservation/ethics , Death , Nuclear Family , Ovary , Parents , Posthumous Conception/ethics , Reproduction/ethics , Adult , Bioethical Issues , Child , Female , Fertility Preservation , Human Rights , Humans , Informed Consent , Morals
15.
Sci Eng Ethics ; 25(2): 635-642, 2019 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29423621

ABSTRACT

Being inherently different from any other lifesaving organ transplant, uterine transplantation does not aim at saving lives but supporting the possibility to generate life. Unlike the kidneys or the liver, the uterus is not specifically a vital organ. Given the non-lifesaving nature of this procedure, questions have been raised about its feasibility. The ethical dilemma revolves around whether it is worth placing two lives at risk related to surgery and immunosuppression, amongst others, to enable a woman with absolute uterine factor infertility to experience the presence of an organ enabling childbirth. In the year 2000, the first uterine transplantation, albeit unsuccessful, was performed in Saudi Arabia from where it has spread to the rest of the world including Sweden, the United States and now recently India. The procedure is, however, still in the preclinical stages and several ethical, legal, social and religious concerns are yet to be addressed before it can be integrated into the clinical setting as standard of care for women with absolute uterine factor infertility.


Subject(s)
Infertility, Female/surgery , Organ Transplantation/ethics , Reproduction/ethics , Reproductive Techniques, Assisted/ethics , Uterus/surgery , Bioethical Issues , Female , Humans , India , Infertility, Female/etiology , Life , Organ Transplantation/adverse effects , Reproductive Techniques, Assisted/adverse effects , Risk , Safety , Saudi Arabia , Sweden , Tissue Donors/ethics , United States , Uterus/pathology
16.
Bioethics ; 33(2): 267-273, 2019 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30480852

ABSTRACT

According to the causal theory of parenthood, people incur parental obligations by causing children to exist. Proponents of the causal theory often argue that gamete donors have special obligations to their genetic offspring. In response, many defenders of current gamete donation practices would reject the causal theory. In particular, they may invoke the 'too many parents problem': many people who causally contribute to the existence of children - for instance, fertility doctors - do not thereby incur parental obligations. This article argues that the conclusions commonly drawn by causal theorists, and by their critics, are premature. Causal theorists have a promising response to the too many parents problem. This response, however, defuses the moral concern that many causal theorists have raised about gamete donation. A similar point, it is argued, applies to Rivka Weinberg's 'Hazmat Theory'.


Subject(s)
Donor Conception/ethics , Germ Cells , Moral Obligations , Parent-Child Relations , Parents , Reproduction/ethics , Tissue Donors/ethics , Adult , Bioethical Issues , Child , Dissent and Disputes , Female , Humans , Male , Physicians/ethics , Spermatozoa , Tissue and Organ Procurement
17.
Bioethics ; 33(1): 60-67, 2019 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30136749

ABSTRACT

This paper explores whether egg donation could still be ethically justified if in vitro gametogenesis (IVG) became reliable and safe. In order to do this, issues and concerns that might inform a patient's reasoning in choosing to use donor eggs instead of IVG are explored and assessed. It is concluded that egg donation would only be ethically justified in a narrow range of special cases given the (hypothetical) availability of IVG treatment and, further, that egg donation could itself be replaced by donation through IVG techniques. Two possible criticisms of this position are then considered: Ones based on respect for patient wishes, and on loss of donor benefit. It is concluded that whilst neither argument constitutes a strong enough reason to continue with programmes of egg donation, egg-sharing programmes could still be permitted come the advent of IVG; these could then provide a morally acceptable source of "natural" donor eggs.


Subject(s)
Dissent and Disputes , Eggs , Genetic Engineering/ethics , Oogenesis , Reproduction/ethics , Reproductive Techniques, Assisted/ethics , Adult , Child , Choice Behavior , Female , Gametogenesis , Humans , Mothers , Patient Rights , Reproduction/genetics , Stem Cell Research , Stem Cells , Tissue Donors/ethics , Tissue and Organ Procurement
18.
Bioethics ; 33(1): 98-104, 2019 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30311673

ABSTRACT

Advances in genomic technologies such as CRISPR-Cas9, mitochondrial replacement techniques, and in vitro gametogenesis may soon give us more precise and efficient tools to have children with certain traits such as beauty, intelligence, and athleticism. In this paper, I propose a new approach to the ethics of reproductive genetic engineering, a human rights approach. This approach relies on two claims that have certain, independent plausibility: (a) human beings have equal moral status, and (b) human beings have human rights to the fundamental conditions for pursuing a good life. I first argue that the human rights approach gives us a lower bound of when reproductive genetic engineering would be permissible. I then compare this approach with other approaches such as the libertarian, perfectionist, and life worth living approaches. Against these approaches, I argue that the human rights approach offers a novel, and more plausible, way of assessing the ethics of reproductive genetic engineering.


Subject(s)
Bioethical Issues , Genetic Engineering/ethics , Human Rights , Life , Moral Status , Reproduction/ethics , Biomedical Enhancement , Child , Ethical Analysis , Genetic Therapy , Humans
19.
Bioethics ; 33(1): 76-81, 2019 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30341923

ABSTRACT

Ectogenesis, or the use of an artificial womb to allow a foetus to develop, will likely become a reality within a few decades, and could significantly affect the abortion debate. We first examine the implications for Judith Jarvis Thomson's violinist analogy, which argues for a woman's right to withdraw life support from the foetus and so terminate her pregnancy, even if the foetus is granted full moral status. We show that on Thomson's reasoning, there is no right to the death of the foetus, and abortion is not permissible if ectogenesis is available, provided it is safe and inexpensive. This raises the question of whether there are persuasive reasons for the right to the death of the foetus that could be exercised in the context of ectogenesis. Eric Mathison and Jeremy Davis have examined several arguments for this right, doubting that it exists, while Joona Räsänen has recently criticized their reasoning. We respond to Räsänen's analysis, concluding that his arguments are unsuccessful, and that there is no right to the death of the foetus in these circumstances.


Subject(s)
Abortion, Induced/ethics , Death , Dissent and Disputes , Ectogenesis/ethics , Fetus , Human Rights , Reproductive Techniques, Assisted/ethics , Female , Humans , Moral Obligations , Moral Status , Personhood , Pregnancy , Reproduction/ethics , Women's Rights
20.
Bioethics ; 33(1): 68-75, 2019 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30182368

ABSTRACT

In vitro gametogenesis (IVG) is believed to be the next big breakthrough in reproductive medicine. The prima facie acceptance of this possible future technology is notable when compared to the general prohibition on human reproductive cloning. After all, if safety is the main reason for not allowing reproductive cloning, one might expect a similar conclusion for the reproductive application of IVG, since both technologies hold considerable and comparable risks. However, safety concerns may be overcome, and are presumably not the sole reason why cloning is being condemned. We therefore assess the non-safety arguments against reproductive cloning, yet most of these can also be held against IVG. The few arguments that cannot be used against IVG are defective. We conclude from this that it will be hard to defend a ban on reproductive cloning while accepting the reproductive use of IVG.


Subject(s)
Cloning, Organism/ethics , Gametogenesis , Genetic Engineering/ethics , Germ Cells , Reproduction/ethics , Reproductive Techniques, Assisted/ethics , Stem Cells , Child , Cloning, Organism/legislation & jurisprudence , Dissent and Disputes , Genetic Engineering/legislation & jurisprudence , Humans , Parents , Reproductive Techniques, Assisted/legislation & jurisprudence , Social Control, Formal
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...