生殖伦理与家庭。

New Zealand bioethics journal Pub Date : 2000-06-01
J L Nelson
{"title":"生殖伦理与家庭。","authors":"J L Nelson","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The phrase 'reproductive ethics', as used by bioethicists, typically refers to concerns over morally appropriate employment of assisted reproductive technologies and, perhaps somewhat less commonly, to issues arising from technologies that block conception or end pregnancies. I here recommend to the attention of the field a more commodious use of 'reproductive ethics', one that takes seriously how humans are brought into the world as moral and social beings, and not simply as biological individuals. As a focus for this expanded agenda, I examine prevalent disagreements over the patterns and sources of the responsibilities and prerogatives that help define family structures, both as these are reflected in assisted reproductive practices involving the purchase of gametes, and in U.S. legal controversies about whether parents, or family courts, should determine who has the right to a relationship with children.</p>","PeriodicalId":87199,"journal":{"name":"New Zealand bioethics journal","volume":"1 1","pages":"4-10"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2000-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reproductive ethics and the family.\",\"authors\":\"J L Nelson\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The phrase 'reproductive ethics', as used by bioethicists, typically refers to concerns over morally appropriate employment of assisted reproductive technologies and, perhaps somewhat less commonly, to issues arising from technologies that block conception or end pregnancies. I here recommend to the attention of the field a more commodious use of 'reproductive ethics', one that takes seriously how humans are brought into the world as moral and social beings, and not simply as biological individuals. As a focus for this expanded agenda, I examine prevalent disagreements over the patterns and sources of the responsibilities and prerogatives that help define family structures, both as these are reflected in assisted reproductive practices involving the purchase of gametes, and in U.S. legal controversies about whether parents, or family courts, should determine who has the right to a relationship with children.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":87199,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"New Zealand bioethics journal\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"4-10\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2000-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"New Zealand bioethics journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Zealand bioethics journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

生物伦理学家使用的“生殖伦理”一词通常指的是对辅助生殖技术在道德上是否合适的使用的担忧,以及可能不太常见的,由阻止受孕或终止妊娠的技术引起的问题。在此,我建议该领域更加广泛地使用“生殖伦理学”,这是一个严肃对待人类如何作为道德和社会存在而不仅仅是作为生物个体来到这个世界的问题。作为这一扩展议程的重点,我研究了在帮助定义家庭结构的责任和特权的模式和来源方面普遍存在的分歧,这些分歧既反映在涉及购买配子的辅助生殖实践中,也反映在美国关于父母还是家庭法院应该决定谁有权与孩子建立关系的法律争议中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Reproductive ethics and the family.

The phrase 'reproductive ethics', as used by bioethicists, typically refers to concerns over morally appropriate employment of assisted reproductive technologies and, perhaps somewhat less commonly, to issues arising from technologies that block conception or end pregnancies. I here recommend to the attention of the field a more commodious use of 'reproductive ethics', one that takes seriously how humans are brought into the world as moral and social beings, and not simply as biological individuals. As a focus for this expanded agenda, I examine prevalent disagreements over the patterns and sources of the responsibilities and prerogatives that help define family structures, both as these are reflected in assisted reproductive practices involving the purchase of gametes, and in U.S. legal controversies about whether parents, or family courts, should determine who has the right to a relationship with children.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
In that case: Shane is a professional rugby player who has a contract with a Super 12 team. Response. New Zealand's ethics committees. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry. Protection of health research participants in the United States: a review of two cases. Cytogeneticists' stories around the ethics and social consequences of their work: a New Zealand case study.
×
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