Latest articles
Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust v DV (A Child) [2021] EWHC 1037 (Fam)
(Family Division, Cohen J, 19 April 2021)Medical Treatment – 17-year-old had form of bone cancer and required surgery For comprehensive, judicially approved coverage of every important...
Domestic Abuse Bill
Aaron Gates-Lincoln, Immigration NewsAfter years of development the Domestic Abuse Bill returned to the House of Lords in the UK on the 8th March 2021 to complete its report stage, one of the final...
Coercive control and children’s welfare in Re H-N and Others
When families come to strife, arrangements must be made for the future care of any children. In some circumstances, this means an application to the courts. These ‘private law orders’ can...
Profession: Expert Witness
The value of a family business or business interest is treated as an asset and therefore part of the matrimonial pot to be distributed when it comes to negotiating a financial settlement on divorce or...
How does a jointly held property pass on death?
When meeting with clients to discuss their succession planning, many cannot recall whether their property is held jointly as joint tenants or jointly as tenants in common. The distinction is that with...
View all articles

Between unconditional acceptance and responsibility: should family ethics limit the scope of reproductive autonomy? [2009] CFLQ 309

Sep 29, 2018, 17:59 PM
Slug : between-unconditional-acceptance-and-responsibility-should-family-ethics-limit-the-scope-of-reproductive-autonomy-2009-cflq-309
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Sep 26, 2011, 09:41 AM
Article ID : 96189

Reproductive technologies have an influence on the perception of the family and its structure. A particular issue is whether reproductive autonomy should include the right to influence the characteristics of the newborn. The paper investigates this question in two different aspects: first, when sex selection of the future child for social purposes is requested through preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), and second, when genetic testing is used for medical purposes to avoid the birth of a child with a disease or disability. I argue that the moral values of the family, with an emphasis on unconditional love and acceptance, should prevent the use of sex selection for social purposes. As for medical purposes, I argue that the moral responsibility of the prospective parents to the future child may influence the decision of whether to undergo termination of pregnancy or destruction of fertilised eggs. Ultimately, therefore, the moral values of the family should be considered when a decision for medical purposes is made.

‘To love this particular child is to love his disability as well.'

Categories :
  • Articles
  • CFLQ
Tags :
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from