Midwifery students’ perceptions on ethical rights of women using assisted reproductive technologies

IF 1.2 Q4 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES International Journal of Human Rights in Healthcare Pub Date : 2023-11-27 DOI:10.1108/ijhrh-05-2023-0041
Sibel Ejder Tekgündüz, A. Gürol, Serap Ejder Apay
{"title":"Midwifery students’ perceptions on ethical rights of women using assisted reproductive technologies","authors":"Sibel Ejder Tekgündüz, A. Gürol, Serap Ejder Apay","doi":"10.1108/ijhrh-05-2023-0041","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose This study aims to understand how midwifery students view ethical rights concerning the usage of reproductive technologies. Design/methodology/approach A series of focus groups were conducted with midwifery students who were asked to discuss four novel scenarios highlighting some of the most controversial issues on the ethics of assisted reproductive technologies. The sample consisted of third-year students studying at the Department of Midwifery of a university in the fall semester of the 2020–2021 academic year. In total, 60 students aged between 20 and 23 participated in the study (mean age 21.5 years). Findings Four scenarios that may be encountered in the use of assisted reproductive techniques were presented to the students. These scenarios were about IVF treatment, using the preimplantation gender identification technique, surrogate mother and using frozen zygotes. Four themes were identified from the analysis of the focus group data related to all four scenarios. These themes were: female reproduction, sex selection, surrogacy and reproductive cloning. Originality/value This study reveals what midwifery students consider essential components of assisted reproduction techniques, focusing on the professional attributes of shared decision-making. The results suggest that student midwives are sensitive to the range of ethical dilemmas associated with the increased use of technology in human reproduction, and construct distinct bound arise in relation to what is considered of benefit or good to the mother, parents, the child and to society. They also expressed their opposition to the excessive use of technological intervention, preferring instead to maintain a more naturalistic approach to reproduction.","PeriodicalId":14129,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Human Rights in Healthcare","volume":"44 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Human Rights in Healthcare","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/ijhrh-05-2023-0041","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to understand how midwifery students view ethical rights concerning the usage of reproductive technologies. Design/methodology/approach A series of focus groups were conducted with midwifery students who were asked to discuss four novel scenarios highlighting some of the most controversial issues on the ethics of assisted reproductive technologies. The sample consisted of third-year students studying at the Department of Midwifery of a university in the fall semester of the 2020–2021 academic year. In total, 60 students aged between 20 and 23 participated in the study (mean age 21.5 years). Findings Four scenarios that may be encountered in the use of assisted reproductive techniques were presented to the students. These scenarios were about IVF treatment, using the preimplantation gender identification technique, surrogate mother and using frozen zygotes. Four themes were identified from the analysis of the focus group data related to all four scenarios. These themes were: female reproduction, sex selection, surrogacy and reproductive cloning. Originality/value This study reveals what midwifery students consider essential components of assisted reproduction techniques, focusing on the professional attributes of shared decision-making. The results suggest that student midwives are sensitive to the range of ethical dilemmas associated with the increased use of technology in human reproduction, and construct distinct bound arise in relation to what is considered of benefit or good to the mother, parents, the child and to society. They also expressed their opposition to the excessive use of technological intervention, preferring instead to maintain a more naturalistic approach to reproduction.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
助产士学生对使用辅助生殖技术的妇女的伦理权利的看法
目的 本研究旨在了解助产士学生如何看待与使用生殖技术有关的伦理权利。 设计/方法/途径 对助产士专业的学生进行了一系列焦点小组讨论,要求他们讨论四个新颖的情景,这些情景突出了辅助生殖技术伦理方面最具争议性的一些问题。样本包括 2020-2021 学年秋季学期在某大学助产系就读的三年级学生。共有 60 名年龄在 20 至 23 岁之间的学生参与了研究(平均年龄为 21.5 岁)。 研究结果 向学生们展示了在使用辅助生殖技术过程中可能遇到的四种情景。这些情景分别涉及体外受精治疗、使用植入前性别鉴定技术、代孕母亲和使用冷冻合子。通过分析与所有四个情景相关的焦点小组数据,确定了四个主题。这些主题是:女性生殖、性别选择、代孕和生殖克隆。 原创性/价值 本研究揭示了助产士学生认为辅助生殖技术的基本组成部分,重点是共同决策的专业属性。研究结果表明,助产士学生对与人类生殖技术使用增加相关的一系列伦理困境很敏感,并在什么被认为对母亲、父母、孩子和社会有益或有利的问题上构建了明确的界限。她们还表示反对过度使用技术干预,而是更倾向于保持一种更自然的生殖方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
7.10%
发文量
48
期刊介绍: nternational Journal of Human Rights in Healthcare (IJHRH) is an international, peer reviewed journal with a unique practical approach to promoting race equality, inclusion and human rights in health and social care. The journal publishes scholarly and double blind peer-reviewed papers of the highest standard, including case studies and book reviews. IJHRH aims include: -To explore what is currently known about discrimination and disadvantage with a particular focus on health and social care -Push the barriers of the human rights discourse by identifying new avenues for healthcare practice and policy internationally -Create bridges between policymakers, practitioners and researchers -Identify and understand the social determinants of health equity and practical interventions to overcome barriers at national and international levels. The journal welcomes papers which use varied approaches, including discussion of theory, comparative studies, systematic evaluation of interventions, analysis of qualitative data and study of health and social care institutions and the political process. Papers published in IJHRH: -Clearly demonstrate the implications of the research -Provide evidence-rich information -Provoke reflection and support critical analysis of both challenges and strengths -Share examples of best practice and ‘what works’, including user perspectives IJHRH is a hugely valuable source of information for researchers, academics, students, practitioners, managers, policy-makers, commissioning bodies, social workers, psychologists, nurses, voluntary sector workers, service users and carers internationally.
期刊最新文献
The assessment of national conduct in realizing the right to heath: using the framework of United Nations Redirecting to sustainable menstrual products – a holistic approach for improving public health Sandstone mining and silicosis deaths in Rajasthan: a critical legal and policy analysis Midwifery students’ perceptions on ethical rights of women using assisted reproductive technologies Improving healthcare for substance users: the moderating role of psychological flexibility on stigma, mental health, and quality of life
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1