Confucian reflections on the new reproductive model of ROPA

IF 2.1 2区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS Bioethics Pub Date : 2025-02-24 DOI:10.1111/bioe.13402
Yonghui Ma, Hua Chen, Kathryn Muyskens
{"title":"Confucian reflections on the new reproductive model of ROPA","authors":"Yonghui Ma,&nbsp;Hua Chen,&nbsp;Kathryn Muyskens","doi":"10.1111/bioe.13402","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Some countries are legalizing same-sex marriage and assisted reproductive technologies (ART) for homosexual couples. One unique form of ART, ROPA (Reception of Oocytes from Partner), recently stirred up controversy in China, when a custody dispute between a female same-sex couple who used ROPA brought this reproductive model into the public eye. Some Western scholars have argued for the legitimacy of ROPA from the perspective of autonomy and reproductive rights. Yet, these arguments do not easily translate into all cultural contexts, as this case will show. There is a need to articulate the ethical considerations of such technologies in light of local philosophical traditions. To that end, this paper will explore the permissibility of ROPA from a Confucian lens, exploring Confucian perspectives on naturalness, filial piety, family and social harmony. Accordingly, we hope to further the discussion of cross-cultural bioethics.</p>","PeriodicalId":55379,"journal":{"name":"Bioethics","volume":"39 6","pages":"584-593"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/bioe.13402","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bioethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bioe.13402","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Some countries are legalizing same-sex marriage and assisted reproductive technologies (ART) for homosexual couples. One unique form of ART, ROPA (Reception of Oocytes from Partner), recently stirred up controversy in China, when a custody dispute between a female same-sex couple who used ROPA brought this reproductive model into the public eye. Some Western scholars have argued for the legitimacy of ROPA from the perspective of autonomy and reproductive rights. Yet, these arguments do not easily translate into all cultural contexts, as this case will show. There is a need to articulate the ethical considerations of such technologies in light of local philosophical traditions. To that end, this paper will explore the permissibility of ROPA from a Confucian lens, exploring Confucian perspectives on naturalness, filial piety, family and social harmony. Accordingly, we hope to further the discussion of cross-cultural bioethics.

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
儒家对ROPA新生殖模式的思考。
一些国家正在将同性婚姻合法化,并为同性伴侣提供辅助生殖技术(ART)。一种独特的艺术形式——接受伴侣的卵母细胞(ROPA),最近在中国引起了争议,一对使用ROPA的女性同性伴侣之间的监护权纠纷使这种生殖模式进入了公众的视野。一些西方学者从自主权和生育权的角度论证了ROPA的合法性。然而,正如本案例所示,这些论点并不容易被翻译成所有的文化背景。有必要根据当地的哲学传统阐明这些技术的伦理考虑。为此,本文将从儒家的视角来探讨ROPA的容忍度,探讨儒家关于自然、孝道、家庭和社会和谐的观点。因此,我们希望进一步探讨跨文化生物伦理学。
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
Bioethics
Bioethics 医学-医学:伦理
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
9.10%
发文量
127
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: As medical technology continues to develop, the subject of bioethics has an ever increasing practical relevance for all those working in philosophy, medicine, law, sociology, public policy, education and related fields. Bioethics provides a forum for well-argued articles on the ethical questions raised by current issues such as: international collaborative clinical research in developing countries; public health; infectious disease; AIDS; managed care; genomics and stem cell research. These questions are considered in relation to concrete ethical, legal and policy problems, or in terms of the fundamental concepts, principles and theories used in discussions of such problems. Bioethics also features regular Background Briefings on important current debates in the field. These feature articles provide excellent material for bioethics scholars, teachers and students alike.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Dual Use Research of Concern—The Necessity of Global Bioethics Engagement Pain, Power, and Policing: Emotional Injustice in Healthcare Are Conscientious Refusal and Conscientious Provision Mutually Exclusive? A Critique of Kelusa and Giubilini's Argument Three Sources of Incapacity in Anorexia Nervosa
×
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:604180095
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