Pros And Cons Of In Vitro Fertilization

Commercial surrogacy is the process in which a woman is paid a fee to carry and deliver a baby to term. Once the baby is delivered, the woman relinquishes all parental rights to the commissioning couple who exclusively raise the child as their own. Altruistic surrogacy, by contrast, is an arrangement where the surrogate receives reimbursement but only for the expenses that she may have incurred during the pregnancy. In this essay I will argue that commercial surrogacy should not be market-inalienable. I will start by outlining Elizabeth Anderson’s argument in “Is Women’s Labor a Commodity?” in which she offers a number of criticisms to commercial surrogacy. I will then outline objections to the argument and highlight how her argument is highly speculative and does not provide an adequate basis for the prohibition of commercial surrogacy.

Purdy defends surrogate mothering from a consequentialist point of view. Her case is founded on two premises: firstly, that surrogacy is favourable (that is, it brings about pleasure and reduces pain), and secondly, that the practice is only non-traditional and not morally reprehensible. She thus concludes that "appealing to the sacrosanctity of traditional marriage or of blood ties to prohibit otherwise acceptable practices that would satisfy people 's desires hardly makes sense", and thus, surrogacy should be permissible (Purdy, 1999).

When one or more persons contract with a woman to gestate a child than relinquish that child after birth to the person or couple is known as surrogacy. It is a course of action that goes outside of natural reproduction. For some, it is the only method of having children, extending family. Surrogacy has been stirring up many controversies over the years. Ethics, morals, laws, religious views, etc. have played a major role in the issues that follow the topic of surrogacy. Laws and regulations pertaining to surrogacy vary from state to state. Some states have no enforceable laws

We are living in a new era where technology can help women have babies in unconventional ways. Having children is a personal choice. In some people’s view, government should not be regulating when people should and should not start having a family. The ethical issue is when the parents start applying for governmental benefits after the baby is conceived via In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) and born posthumously. When practicing IVF, are we violating God’s will? This paper is to discuss the views of the four candidates interviewed in relation to posthumous conception and delivery, their views on benefits/inheritance entitlement to these babies, and ethical principles and theories in

Chile's health system has been evolving rapidly in recent years. The assigned role of the Chilean Medical Association has focused on medical ethics codes, and laws. Social organizations have emerged during the last decade and have been working together with the Chilean Fertility Society to change public health policies and attitudes in order to increase the access of people to modern reproductive technology. The current government has passed the August Law which decriminalizes abortion under three circumstances, the government also signed the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), which establishes safe healthcare as a human right.(6) “Today, women have won, democracy has won, all of Chile has won,” said Bachelet(2). On the other hand, Reproductive technology, assisted reproductive technology (ART), is utilized but faces opposition from factors of social-religious conservatism, and gender-based discrimination. While reproductive technologies can be accessed by those who can afford out of pocket funding, most of the population relies on public healthcare, resulting in less than 4% of the population receiving treatment.(5) In this sense, more research of reproductive technologies, specifically mitochondrial transfer, should be reliant on biomedical research of genetic on bioethical levels, as gene therapy is authorized only for the purpose of treating diseases or preventing their appearance(4). In this sense, the mitochondrial

In their article “Cutting Motherhood in Two: Some Suspicions Concerning Surrogacy”, Hilde Lindemann Nelson and James Lindemann Nelson argue against the idea of commercial surrogacy. Their main argument revolves around the rights that biological parents owe to the children they bring into the world. This argument can be formulated as follows: 1) Bringing a child into the world makes a child vulnerable to harm, 2) Both of a child’s biological parents have duties and obligations to defend the child from harm, 3) Only biological parents can fulfill the duties to defend the child from harm and it is immoral for a parent not to do so, 4) Surrogate motherhood contracts require the biological mother to give up her parental rights, 5) Giving up parental rights prevents the biological mother from fulfilling her duties to the child, Therefore, 6) Surrogate motherhood contracts are immoral because the duties to the child are not met. This argument is, as any good argument must be, logically valid. It is impossible to disagree with the conclusion if the premises are true. However, this argument is unsound because not all of the premises are true. Biological parents are not the only people who can fulfill the duties owed to a child and protect them from harm. Surrogate motherhood contracts do not prevent the duties owed to the child from being met.

Judith Warner criticizes commercial surrogacy especially in the case of India because it exploits the poor Indian women by taking advantage of their need for money and ability to grow a baby. Describing surrogacy as dehumanization Warner and Gentleman agree that a surrogate mother is a “mere host” that rents out her womb for money (Gentleman, Warner).Warner again criticizes surrogacy stating that there is “more to the process of carrying a baby and giving birth to it than being an incubator on legs” like the physiological and psychological factors that bind a mother and baby at birth (Warner).

Those procedures make ways for persons that would otherwise have no hope of conception to conceive, and give birth to healthy babies, but on the other hand, as the technology has developed, ethical issues surrounding these methods have as well. Some philosophers like Gillian Hanscombe feels that “it is untenable and uncivilized to deny the right to any individual just on the basis that they engage in a particular type of sex practice.” (class notes) Therefore, in this instance, lesbians and gays should have the right to parenthood, whether it’s by surrogate or by sperm insertion, and it should not be looked at as unethical. When it comes to third-party reproduction or surrogacy, Purdy feels that it is not unethical and “argues that it is routine to do so.” (class notes) Though third party reproduction involves risks and raise many important ethical concerns, she also argues that “parents should guarantee that any child they have possess normal health.” (class notes) Therefore, in her opinion, the creation and selection of embryos is ethical. On the other hand, Michael Tooley opposes her opinion and “argues that the practice is not in principle morally acceptable given our level of understanding but could offer some benefits in the future.” (class

Parks realizes that a care ethics perspective makes global surrogacy expensive, rendering it undesirable from an economic point of view. This revelation is not a problem for care ethics, if it means the surrogates are to be seen as morally equal to the infants, the commissioned parents, then Parks has fulfilled her goal. Care is expensive, but this proves to be beneficial to this theory. In an effort to avoid a false dichotomy, commissioned parents either have to care for their future children and the surrogates that carry those children, or choose other means of reproductive assistance which are as expensive. Care ethics makes it possible to illustrate that there are more than economic benefits and abstract ethical norms that should be considered in terms of reproductive

Deborah L. Spar’s book, The Baby Business, provides an eye opening experience about surrogacy and the selling of eggs without women becoming pregnant. I am surprised to know how people in general and the field of medicine in particular can and has find ways to make the process of procreation possible and a accessible through marketing. Considering the time of Abraham when Sara who longed to have a child asked her husband to give her a child through her maid and claim him/her as her own, was

Adversaries of surrogacy see these risks and different issues as destructive to people, families and social orders and they feel that eventually legitimizing the practice would bring about an absence of admiration for the sacredness of life (Parliament of Canada, 2006). Society’s perspective will immediately be altered and surrogacy and surrogate mothers will become the topic of focus and be exposed to a whirlwind of controversy – controversy on that the procedure and technology isn’t the natural way of life. Surrogacy is an extremely exhausting procedure both physically and mentally for the women who put their body on the line. Dangers are like those that may be knowledgeable about every single other strategy for helped regenerative treatment (Better Health Gov., 2012). These dangers exceed the advantages and in view of alternating feelings and dispositions towards the embryo amid development, it is impractical for a pregnant lady to give genuinely educated agree to surrender a new born child until after conception has happened because of these safety welfares (Callahan,

Surrogacy is essentially a method of childbearing that an individual or couple may adopt if they are unable to have a child of their own, thus resulting in the need of a surrogate to bear a biological child for them. Surrogacy has been a documented and viable form of child bearing since the mid 1970’s. However the breakthrough was not only a success but a landmark in law. Multiple court cases and issues arose due to commercial and international surrogacy as well as defining who the legal parents are in many instances.

Assisted reproductive technology, or ART is a treatment that is used to help infertile women. This is a treatment that extracts a women’s egg and mixes it with a man’s sperm. This process helps make an embryo. The embryo is made and placed by into the woman. Vitro fertilization is a type of assisted reproductive technology that is more commonly used. These techniques are often done with donors or surrogates. This type of technology can be a gift for families who want a child naturally but can’t produce them, but is this really a good thing to get done?

Some view altruistic surrogacy as a form of exploiting the surrogate. There is no monetary compensation to woman placing her health and well-being on the line for another’s benefit. However, it can also be held that the woman knowingly entered into the agreement with full disclosure of the risks and benefits to her health and body. Again, autonomy and justice are extremely prevalent ethical principles to explore when discussing the topic of surrogacy. Same-sex marriage has become a hot topic in the United States in the last few years. The idea of raising a family by homosexual

Surrogate Motherhood is something that not many people actually support, even though it “is one of the many reproductive techniques that have enabled infertile couples to have children” (qtd. in Freedman). There are two types of surrogacy, traditional and gestational. The traditional type of surrogacy involves the surrogate mother being (AI) artificially inseminated with the sperm of the intended father or sperm from a donor when the sperm count is low. In either case the surrogate’s own egg will be used. Genetically the surrogate becomes the mother of the resulting child (Storey). Although there are two different types of surrogacy, a traditional surrogacy is rarely seen or done anymore. In gestational surrogacy, the surrogate mother has