NOTABLE QUOTE: "...equity in the preservation of personal identity has not received as much attention as the rights of adults to fertility treatment."
Brenda Almond
Fertility clinics are creating a new class of dispossessed human beings, says a British philosopher.
Baby manufacture is already big business. Recent ads targeting women college students in America have offered them free holidays in India in exchange for parting with their eggs during their visit, with Indian women teamed to become paid surrogates and return the product – the student’s child – to those who commissioned it. Do other jurisdictions want to follow this precedent and should Americans be more concerned about what is done in their name? The selling of slaves was considered offensive – should selling babies be OK?
http://www.mercatornet.com/articles/view/babies_have_a_right_to_a_heritage/
Showing posts with label test-tube babies. Show all posts
Showing posts with label test-tube babies. Show all posts
Friday, August 14, 2009
Saturday, April 11, 2009
What about those octuplets?
Jennifer Roback Morse
Government indifference to responsible fatherhood is what made the tragedy of OctoMom possible.
What are we to make of the case of Nadya Suleman, the California woman who gave birth to octuplets through IVF? The case has inspired lots of internet chatter and water cooler talk. I maintain that insurance and government funding are the least of the worries of this case. The case illustrates two deep problems with our current attitudes toward artificial reproductive technology (ART). First, no one has a right to have a baby. Second, the state should not be in the business of deliberately separating father from their children.
http://www.mercatornet.com/articles/view/what_about_those_octuplets/
Government indifference to responsible fatherhood is what made the tragedy of OctoMom possible.
What are we to make of the case of Nadya Suleman, the California woman who gave birth to octuplets through IVF? The case has inspired lots of internet chatter and water cooler talk. I maintain that insurance and government funding are the least of the worries of this case. The case illustrates two deep problems with our current attitudes toward artificial reproductive technology (ART). First, no one has a right to have a baby. Second, the state should not be in the business of deliberately separating father from their children.
http://www.mercatornet.com/articles/view/what_about_those_octuplets/
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
What about the Children?
by Renee Smith
Kathleen LaBounty is 27 years old and has no idea who her biological father is.
Kathleen's problem is complicated further by the fact that she was conceived through sperm donation during the period of mandatory anonymous donations in the early 1980's.
Continue...
Kathleen LaBounty is 27 years old and has no idea who her biological father is.
Kathleen's problem is complicated further by the fact that she was conceived through sperm donation during the period of mandatory anonymous donations in the early 1980's.
Continue...
Thursday, January 15, 2009
A creation myth for the 21st century
By Lea Singh
Did anyone ever ask IVF children whether they wanted to go through life as genetic orphans?
This month, a court in British Columbia, Canada is expected to certify an important class action that was launched near the end of last year by a gutsy 26-year-old journalist. Her name is Olivia Pratten, and her lawsuit is likely to become a major thorn in the side of the booming fertility industry. Olivia was conceived with the sperm of an anonymous donor, and she is supposed to not care about her genetic origins -- after all, she was wanted and loved by her "intended" parents. But Olivia compares herself to adopted children, and like them, she wants the law to recognize her right to information about her biological parent.
Continue...
Did anyone ever ask IVF children whether they wanted to go through life as genetic orphans?
This month, a court in British Columbia, Canada is expected to certify an important class action that was launched near the end of last year by a gutsy 26-year-old journalist. Her name is Olivia Pratten, and her lawsuit is likely to become a major thorn in the side of the booming fertility industry. Olivia was conceived with the sperm of an anonymous donor, and she is supposed to not care about her genetic origins -- after all, she was wanted and loved by her "intended" parents. But Olivia compares herself to adopted children, and like them, she wants the law to recognize her right to information about her biological parent.
Continue...
Monday, December 15, 2008
Men obsolete in test-tube world
Men are biologically vulnerable in the new world of reproduction.
It is a world where deaf people select deaf babies and where scientists ''mix'' animals and humans.
And it is much closer to reality than many may think.
Academic lawyer Baroness Ruth Deech described the landscape of modern reproduction in a public lecture yesterday at the Australian National University's college of law.
Baroness Deech was the first chairwoman of Britain's reproduction technology regulatory body, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority.
She said one day reproduction technology might allow women to grow their own sperm.
''Who needs men?'' she joked during her lecture.
''I'm awfully sorry to any young men here... biologically you're on the way out. It would therefore be a good idea to make yourselves attractive and useful around the house.''
Baroness Deech talked about Britain's new Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act and what it would mean for reproduction.
The new law would allow scientists to take an egg from an animal such as a cow and implant human DNA into the egg.
The move sparked demonstrations outside Parliament.
''The public got the idea that someone was going to grow half man, half animal,'' Baroness Deech said.
''That's not the case. We're talking about an egg and a sperm so small that the human eye can't see it. It's only for research and it can only be kept 14 days.
''That will allow much more research to go ahead, because there will be a greater supply of animal eggs which can be used to study the growth of the human body and disease.''
Baroness Deech drew criticism from deaf lobby groups after voicing her concerns about deaf people choosing an embryo that would result in a deaf baby.
''I thought that was outrageous,'' Baroness Deech said.
A case in Canada involved a deaf, same-sex couple who advertised for a man who had five generations of deafness in his family. They used his sperm with the partner who had four generations of deafness, and had two deaf children.
This year marks the 30th anniversary of the birth of the world's first in-vitro fertilisation baby, Louise Brown.
''IVF and embryology go to the heart of all our feelings, conscious and subconscious about parenthood, about new life, about what we're here for,'' Baroness Deech said. ''When Louise Brown was born in 1978, this amazing event caused shock, surprise, elation in some quarters, but also great fears. I think it's hard for us to remember now just how shocking it was.''
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/local/news/general/men-obsolete-in-testtube-world/1384499.aspx
It is a world where deaf people select deaf babies and where scientists ''mix'' animals and humans.
And it is much closer to reality than many may think.
Academic lawyer Baroness Ruth Deech described the landscape of modern reproduction in a public lecture yesterday at the Australian National University's college of law.
Baroness Deech was the first chairwoman of Britain's reproduction technology regulatory body, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority.
She said one day reproduction technology might allow women to grow their own sperm.
''Who needs men?'' she joked during her lecture.
''I'm awfully sorry to any young men here... biologically you're on the way out. It would therefore be a good idea to make yourselves attractive and useful around the house.''
Baroness Deech talked about Britain's new Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act and what it would mean for reproduction.
The new law would allow scientists to take an egg from an animal such as a cow and implant human DNA into the egg.
The move sparked demonstrations outside Parliament.
''The public got the idea that someone was going to grow half man, half animal,'' Baroness Deech said.
''That's not the case. We're talking about an egg and a sperm so small that the human eye can't see it. It's only for research and it can only be kept 14 days.
''That will allow much more research to go ahead, because there will be a greater supply of animal eggs which can be used to study the growth of the human body and disease.''
Baroness Deech drew criticism from deaf lobby groups after voicing her concerns about deaf people choosing an embryo that would result in a deaf baby.
''I thought that was outrageous,'' Baroness Deech said.
A case in Canada involved a deaf, same-sex couple who advertised for a man who had five generations of deafness in his family. They used his sperm with the partner who had four generations of deafness, and had two deaf children.
This year marks the 30th anniversary of the birth of the world's first in-vitro fertilisation baby, Louise Brown.
''IVF and embryology go to the heart of all our feelings, conscious and subconscious about parenthood, about new life, about what we're here for,'' Baroness Deech said. ''When Louise Brown was born in 1978, this amazing event caused shock, surprise, elation in some quarters, but also great fears. I think it's hard for us to remember now just how shocking it was.''
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/local/news/general/men-obsolete-in-testtube-world/1384499.aspx
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)