Response: arguments to abolish the legal age limits of access to information about the gamete donor by donor offspring.

IF 3.3 2区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS Journal of Medical Ethics Pub Date : 2024-07-26 DOI:10.1136/jme-2024-110230
Inge van Nistelrooij, Nicolette Woestenburg
{"title":"Response: arguments to abolish the legal age limits of access to information about the gamete donor by donor offspring.","authors":"Inge van Nistelrooij, Nicolette Woestenburg","doi":"10.1136/jme-2024-110230","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The <i>Journal of Medical Ethics</i> previously published on the debate in the UK and the Netherlands concerning the legal age limits imposed on donor-conceived people for access to information about the identity of gamete and embryo donors. In that publication, three arguments were foregrounded against lowering these age limits as a general rule for all donor-conceived people. In this contribution, we engage with these arguments and argue why we think they are insufficient to maintain the age limits. In contrast, we argue for a more suited, contextual and relational ethical framework based on care ethics, which emphasises relational autonomy and its dynamic, contextual development. This framework, we argue, provides a comprehensive approach for the analysis we made of the question of age limits and was applied in research performed in the Netherlands, commissioned by the Dutch Minister of Health. The framework enabled us to weigh the multidisciplinary-legal, psychological, phenomenological and ethical-findings of our research.</p>","PeriodicalId":16317,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/jme-2024-110230","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Journal of Medical Ethics previously published on the debate in the UK and the Netherlands concerning the legal age limits imposed on donor-conceived people for access to information about the identity of gamete and embryo donors. In that publication, three arguments were foregrounded against lowering these age limits as a general rule for all donor-conceived people. In this contribution, we engage with these arguments and argue why we think they are insufficient to maintain the age limits. In contrast, we argue for a more suited, contextual and relational ethical framework based on care ethics, which emphasises relational autonomy and its dynamic, contextual development. This framework, we argue, provides a comprehensive approach for the analysis we made of the question of age limits and was applied in research performed in the Netherlands, commissioned by the Dutch Minister of Health. The framework enabled us to weigh the multidisciplinary-legal, psychological, phenomenological and ethical-findings of our research.

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
答复:主张取消对捐献者后代获取配子捐献者信息的法定年龄限制。
医学伦理学杂志》曾就英国和荷兰对捐献者受孕者获取配子和胚胎捐献者身份信息的法定年龄限制进行过辩论。在那篇文章中,有三个论点反对降低这些年龄限制,将其作为适用于所有捐献受孕者的一般规则。在这篇论文中,我们对这些论点进行了讨论,并论证了为什么我们认为这些论点不足以维持年龄限制。与此相反,我们主张在护理伦理学的基础上建立一个更合适、更符合具体情况和更有关系的伦理学框架,该框架强调关系自主性及其动态的、符合具体情况的发展。我们认为,这一框架为我们分析年龄限制问题提供了一种全面的方法,并在荷兰卫生部委托荷兰进行的研究中得到了应用。该框架使我们能够权衡我们研究中的法律、心理、现象学和伦理等多学科发现。
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
Journal of Medical Ethics
Journal of Medical Ethics 医学-医学:伦理
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
9.80%
发文量
164
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Medical Ethics is a leading international journal that reflects the whole field of medical ethics. The journal seeks to promote ethical reflection and conduct in scientific research and medical practice. It features articles on various ethical aspects of health care relevant to health care professionals, members of clinical ethics committees, medical ethics professionals, researchers and bioscientists, policy makers and patients. Subscribers to the Journal of Medical Ethics also receive Medical Humanities journal at no extra cost. JME is the official journal of the Institute of Medical Ethics.
期刊最新文献
Who shall go first? A multicriteria approach to patient selection for first clinical trials of cardiac xenotransplantation. Nrima - a particular Javanese value and its impact on healthcare. Bioethics and the value of disagreement. Existential risk and the justice turn in bioethics. Materiality and practicality: a response to - are clinicians ethically obligated to disclose their use of medical machine learning systems to patients?
×
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