Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Ethics on animal clinical testing
The ethics of animal testing
Ethics on animal clinical testing
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Do you think that the amount of money you pay shows how much you care? If you spend lots of money on something, does it mean that you really love it for the entire life? Maybe for the short-term, it could be the most precious object but it won’t last forever, especially for rich. If a person can afford everything without hesitating or suffering, then this person might think everything is easy to get and is not very precious. Nowadays many couples are infertile and are looking for egg donors to have children. While some people are desperate for the eggs, other people think this process is immoral because it is involved with living things. It is a moral dilemma to buy and sell the egg, and both two are equally problematic since it is related to the money. Although some infertile couples really want eggs to make children, it is unethical to sell or buy the egg if the egg is objectified with money and unnecessary qualification because the egg donation requires a huge responsibility.
It is a moral dilemma when people focus on the egg’s quality because it gives a parental irresponsibility by falling short of their expectation of the baby. In Jessica Cohen’s article, “Grade A: The Market for a Yale Woman’s Eggs,” she says that David and Michelle were looking for “an Ivy League donor” who received a minimum SAT score of 1500, and who is “over five feet five [and] Jewish heritage” (190). David and Michelle advertised in the Yale Daily News that they need a perfect egg donor for $25,000. They didn’t state about the health in their requirements for a right egg, but rather asked about education and appearance. Also on the application on Egg Donation’s Web site is very long with full of unnecessary questions such as “what two of my favorite...
... middle of paper ...
...fertile people really want to have a baby, they should not look for the perfect egg. The money is not the necessary thing to include in the egg donation. Egg sellers can donate their egg without profit only if they want to help infertile people. Egg buyers can get any one egg from the donated eggs, so they cannot choose the best egg. Egg is a first step to develop as an embryo. It is a living being that becomes a human. People should treat an egg properly because it has a right to be treated equally and preciously. If people objectify an egg, they don’t deserve a baby, and they cannot become good parents. Egg donors also do not deserve money and cannot be a good donor if they don’t treat egg rightly. Good donors have a responsibility to have a right purpose of donating their eggs. Good parents have a responsibility to take care of an egg as a precious living thing.
It is said that “Some agree with Pope John Paul II that the selling of organs is morally wrong and violates “the dignity of the human person” (qtd. In Finkel 26), but this is a belief professed by healthy and affluent individuals” (158). MacKay is using ethos the show the morality of those that believe it is wrong for organ sales. The morals shown are those of people who have yet to experience a situation of needing a new organ. Having a healthy and wealthy lifestyle, they cannot relate to those that have trouble with money and a unhealthy lifestyle as the poor. The poor and the middle class are the ones that suffer being last on the list for a transplant, thus have different ethics. Paying an absurd amount of money and still having to be at the bottom of the list for a transplant, is something no person anywhere in the world should have to
Obviously, people who are rich already have an easier time getting an organ transplant. The rich can more easily afford the costs; the poor will not have any more of a cost disadvantage than they already have. Epstein gives these reasons to support his idea that selling organs is not immoral. He does not accurately consider the immoral consequences of allowing organ sales by law. Compensating people for a good deed that is supposed to be selfless will completely change the nature of the action and the motivation behind it. Using money as motivation can be dangerous because of the manner in which harvesting the organ may occur and because of who may be reaping the benefit of the organ sale. Someone could use violence or could misuse their judgment to obtain the money from the organs of another person. Organs should only be allowed to be donated, not sold. Traditionally, donating organs is an act of giving in order to save someone else’s life; it allows a person to be a Good Samaritan. Willingly donating an organ keeps the focus on giving to others, instead of using a motivator that can corrupt, such as money.
In 2001 scientist attempted to create a cloned human embryo, they had consulted all the necessary sources before getting the “ok” to begin “creating”. Then they had to find a female subject to donate eggs. To start the process of cloning they need to use a very fine needle and get the genetic information from a mature egg. Then they inject it into the nucleus of a donor cell. The female donors were asked to take psychological and physical tests to screen for diseases and what not.
The addition of a child into a family’s home is a happy occasion. Unfortunately, some families are unable to have a child due to unforeseen problems, and they must pursue other means than natural pregnancy. Some couples adopt and other couples follow a different path; they utilize in vitro fertilization or surrogate motherhood. The process is complicated, unreliable, but ultimately can give the parents the gift of a child they otherwise could not have had. At the same time, as the process becomes more and more advanced and scientists are able to predict the outcome of the technique, the choice of what child is born is placed in the hands of the parents. Instead of waiting to see if the child had the mother’s eyes, the father’s hair or Grandma’s heart problem, the parents and doctors can select the best eggs and the best sperm to create the perfect child. Many see the rise of in vitro fertilization as the second coming of the Eugenics movement of the 19th and early 20th century. A process that is able to bring joy to so many parents is also seen as deciding who is able to reproduce and what child is worthy of birthing.
Couples experiencing infertility issues now have a number of options at their disposal from in-vitro fertilization to intrauterine insemination or going as far as using a surrogate and donor eggs or donor sperm. Technology has made it possible for someone to experience the joy of parenthood regardless of whether they can naturally conceive children. All of these procedures come with their own ethical questions and pros and cons. One of the biggest moral dilemmas is what to do with the left-over embryos still in storage when a family has decided they have had enough children. Most couples see this ethical quandary because they recognize that the embryos are whole human beings and do not think it is morally right to dispose
All views and opinions should be taken into consideration when looking at areas such as ethics and morality. The topic of organ and tissue transplantation carries many considerations that can sway an individual whether to allow this practice to occur. A major issue that many consider is if this process is considered to be playing against fate and god. Society sometimes feels that taking and receiving organs from others is not acceptable because you are going against the life that is already determined along with taking parts from someone else that is not yours. Genetic engineering of animals and xenotransplantation carry many issues that include animal welfare along with medical considerations. Individuals feel that putting animals through this process just for human benefit is not acceptable and is affecting the way animals live. Others feel that using animal body parts on humans goes against morality completely since it is not natural in any shape or form (Elisabeth H. Ormandy 544). Even though some agree with a black market for organ sales, most are against this idea completely. It has been claimed that paying for organs would be ineffective, that payment would be immoral because it involves the sale of body parts and that the main donors would be the desperate poor, who could come to regret their decision (Elias). Opinions on morals and ethics are always affected when other fluctuating factors are tacked on to the
...ehind their decision on selling organs. Though my understanding of the deciding process behind organ sales has broadened, I still have questions concerning how the financial aspect of organ sales effects the problem of organ shortages. The idea of the “crowding out” effect perplexes me and I want to know more about how it can sway the overall drive to avoid selling organs. I now understand the difference between “intrinsic” and “extrinsic”, but I would like to know more about the role it plays in the influence of organ sales on a person’s general opinion. After learning the reasoning behind monetary sales of organs, I would like to gain more knowledge about the financial side of this topic to fully understand all sides of the organ sales problem. It’s safe to say, before deciding whether to be for or against organ sales, it’s important to get the inside scoop first.
Many studies have been done pertaining to egg donation and its medical aspect, but very few studies shows the ethical implications of egg donations. Health Laws such as Fertility Clinic Success Rate and Certification Act,1992 regulates the advertisement of success rate of fertility clinic. Only few states have federal laws for informed consent from egg donors (1-3). Informed consent means that donor understands all the minor details surrounding the egg donation procedure, its side-effects- medical, legal, ethical and emotional and gives permission to undergo the procedure without hesitation or coercion.
A well-known reporter and writer, Gina Kolata, in her article, More Babies being Born to Be Donors of Tissue, addresses the ethics of conceiving donor babies. Kolata’s purpose is to enlighten the reader on the debate of whether conceiving donor babies is ethical. She uses all three ethos, pathos, and logos, in order to inform the reader that there are many sides of the debate.
Donor-assisted insemination is a process that enables a woman to conceive a child through the donated sperm/egg of a male or female. Donor insemination is a technique that has been used around the world for fifty eight years. This technique is often used in situations where a man or woman suffer from infertility and are unable to produce children on their own. Donor-insemination is also used to help gay people or single people have children. In these cases, the child grow up to never know their genetic father/mother. The children born from donor- assisted reproduction only have access to basic, non-identifying information such as: race, height, eye-color, etc. This is not enough information to settle the donor-inseminated (DI) children's desire to know about their parents. I personally think the DI children have a natural right to know where they came from. Many DI children say that knowing about their genetic parent is something that they desire more than anything in the world. These children have a right to know about their genetic background, not only for themselves, but for their children as well.
The human body, and the organs being prepped for donation are often objectified, making them a “contested terrain” of sorts. This objectification silences the donor and the donors family, making the donor recipient, and the organ transplant surgeons the stars of the show (Sharp, 2001). In the United States, the human body, and organs being donated are often viewed as goods, or objects, being bought and sold for medical purposes. Almost all parts of the human body can be viewed in this manner. Genetic materials associated with reproduction such as placenta, sperm, and ova can be sold as well (Sharp, 2001). Organ transplant lists are very extensive, with a long list of requirements that must be met by the donor recipient before they can even be put on this list. Because some people can be on this list for many years, there is a strong desire, or desperation, for a life saving organ, that individuals will go through the black market to get
A woman enters into a contract that consists on her getting pregnant with a strangers sperms, and after the baby is born, to give up the baby. The stranger is going to pay the medical expenses and $10,000 in exchange of claiming all the parental rights when the baby is born. The stranger is a good person who has not been able to have children on his own. Why does the morality of the action may seem doubtful? Philosopher Elizabeth Anderson wrote an essay called “is Women’s Labor a Commodity?” to explain in detail the reasons of commercial surrogacy being morally wrong. In her paper, Anderson explains that commercial surrogacy treats children and parental rights as objects that could be bought and sold for personal convenience. According to
For those who lack healthy organs, organ donations can save their life. Although there’s a tight spot, there is a shortage of much needed organs; the Mayo Clinic notes, “More than 101,000 people are waiting today for transplant surgeries.” The clinic goes on to state that while daily, 77 people receive organ transplants, nineteen die waiting for a transplant. Those waiting for transplants could likely be saved with a larger pool for organ donation. Many proposals have arisen to increase the number of organ donors in the United States, ranging from presumed consent to financial incentives for organ donation. The latter, financial incentives, is a common suggestion drawing much controversy. While some assert that financial incentives could save lives, others argue that paying for organs will erode altruism and will ca...
What happens when a family has an ill child whose only hope is to have a donor, but there is no perfect match for a donor? Some families resort to creating a savior sibling. Lahl refers to savior siblings as kids formed through “in vitro fertilization” to serve as a “match” for their sibling(s) who require a “donor ” to survive (Lahl 1).However, not everyone is alright with the idea of creating savior siblings. Some people like Catholics believe it is unethical to produce human beings for the sole purpose of saving someone else’s life while others like doctors think it is beneficial to humanity. French Catholic bishops believe it is disrespectful of the kid’s “dignity” to be born “to be used”(Fournier 1).
Additionally, the act of selling a baby is considered to be immoral, as “certain things should not be bought and sold” (Sandel, 100). This implies that there are some objects or people in the world that must be treated in a certain way in order to be regarded in a proper manner. While motherhood and pregnancy is typically treated with respect, the male reproductive system is seen very differently. Sperm banks are a commercialization of fatherhood, but this usually does not instill frustration in society as surrogacy does. In general, Sandel’s argument attempts to convey the idea that coercion questions how the market affects society’s free-will, while corruption questions the morality of an object or good. In this case, the differing views that society has of fatherhood and motherhood reveals that corruption must be analyzed differently for some goods, as well as how views should be altered to be more befitting of the