Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. From Self‐Determination to Offspring‐Determination? Reproductive Autonomy, Procrustean Parenting, and Genetic Enhancement.Jon Rueda - 2021 - Theoria 88 (6):1086-1110.
    Emerging reprogenetic technologies may radically change how humans reproduce in the not-so-distant future. One foreseeable consequence of disruptive innovations in the procreative domain is an increase in the reproductive autonomy of intended parents. Regarding the prospective parental liberty of enhancing non-health–related traits of the offspring, one controversy has particularly dominated the literature. Does parents' choice of genetically enhancing the traits of their descendants compromise children's future personal autonomy? In this article, I will analyse the main arguments which posit that reprogenetic (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • The unwitting sacrifice problem.G. Gillett - 2005 - Journal of Medical Ethics 31 (6):327-332.
    The diagnosis of bipolar disorder has been linked to giftedness of various sorts and this raises a special problem in that it is likely that the condition has a genetic basis. Therefore it seems possible that in the near future we will be able to detect and eliminate the gene predisposing to the disorder. This may mean, however, that, as a society, we lose the associated gifts. We might then face a difficult decision either way in that it is unclear (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Good Parents, Better Babies : An Argument about Reproductive Technologies, Enhancement and Ethics.Erik Malmqvist - unknown
    This study is a contribution to the bioethical debate about new and possibly emerging reproductive technologies. Its point of departure is the intuition, which many people seem to share, that using such technologies to select non-disease traits – like sex and emotional stability - in yet unborn children is morally problematic, at least more so than using the technologies to avoid giving birth to children with severe genetic diseases, or attempting to shape the non-disease traits of already existing children by (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Analysing our qualms about “designing” future persons: Autonomy, freedom of choice, and interfering with nature. [REVIEW]Erik Malmqvist - 2007 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 10 (4):407-416.
    Actually possible and conceivable future uses of preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) and germ-line genetic intervention in assisted reproduction seem to offer increasing possibilities of choosing the kind of persons that will be brought to existence. Many are troubled by the idea of these technologies being used for enhancement purposes. How can we make sense of this worry? Why are our thoughts about therapeutic genetic interventions and non-genetic enhancement (for instance education) not accompanied by the same intuitive uneasiness? I argue that (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Respect for Personal Autonomy, Human Dignity, and the Problems of Self-Directedness and Botched Autonomy.Y. M. Barilan - 2011 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 36 (5):496-515.
    This paper explores the value of respect for personal autonomy in relation to clearly immoral and irrational acts committed freely and intentionally by competent people. Following Berlin's distinction between two kinds of liberty and Darwall's two kinds of respect, it is argued that coercive suppression of nonautonomous, irrational, and self-harming acts of competent persons is offensive to their human dignity, but not disrespectful of personal autonomy. Irrational and immoral choices made by competent people may claim only the negative liberty to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations