Ectogenesis and the Right to Life

IF 0.4 0 PHILOSOPHY Diametros Pub Date : 2022-12-23 DOI:10.33392/diam.1850
Prabhpal Singh
{"title":"Ectogenesis and the Right to Life","authors":"Prabhpal Singh","doi":"10.33392/diam.1850","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this discussion note on Michal Pruski and Richard C. Playford’s “Artificial Wombs, Thomson and Abortion – What Might Change?,” I consider whether the prospect of ectogenesis technology would make abortion impermissible. I argue that a Thomson-style defense may not become inapplicable due to the right to life being conceived as a negative right. Further, if Thomson-style defenses do become inapplicable, those who claim that ectogenesis would be an obligatory alternative to abortion cannot do so without first showing that fetuses have a right to life, something that Thomson assumed rather than argued for. I also include a discussion on ethical problems concerning what to do about children born from artificial wombs put there by those who looked to terminate their pregnancies because they sought to avoid parenthood.","PeriodicalId":42290,"journal":{"name":"Diametros","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diametros","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33392/diam.1850","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this discussion note on Michal Pruski and Richard C. Playford’s “Artificial Wombs, Thomson and Abortion – What Might Change?,” I consider whether the prospect of ectogenesis technology would make abortion impermissible. I argue that a Thomson-style defense may not become inapplicable due to the right to life being conceived as a negative right. Further, if Thomson-style defenses do become inapplicable, those who claim that ectogenesis would be an obligatory alternative to abortion cannot do so without first showing that fetuses have a right to life, something that Thomson assumed rather than argued for. I also include a discussion on ethical problems concerning what to do about children born from artificial wombs put there by those who looked to terminate their pregnancies because they sought to avoid parenthood.
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
共生与生命权
在这篇关于michael Pruski和Richard C. Playford合著的《人工子宫、Thomson和堕胎——什么会改变?》“我考虑的是,体外生殖技术的前景是否会让堕胎变得不被允许。我认为,汤姆森式的辩护可能不会因为生命权被视为一种消极权利而变得不适用。此外,如果汤姆森式的辩护确实变得不适用,那些声称体外生殖是堕胎的强制性选择的人,如果没有首先证明胎儿有生命权,就不能这样做,这是汤姆森假设而不是争论的。我还讨论了伦理问题,即如何处理那些想要终止怀孕的人在人工子宫里生下的孩子,因为他们想要逃避父母的身份。
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
Diametros
Diametros PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
I Act Therefore I Live? Autopoiesis, Sensorimotor Autonomy, and Extended Agency Research ethics in a multilingual world: A guide to reflecting on language decisions in all disciplines Expertise and Expert Authority Ethical challenges in contemporary social research (editorial) Beyond the participant-researcher division: co-creating ethical relationships through care and rapport in studies of post-laryngectomy communication
×
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