More handpicked essays just for you.
Recent papers on assisted reproductive technology
Principles of reproductive technologies
Recent papers on assisted reproductive technology
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Throughout the past several years, the gap between technological change and policy development has continued to grow at a rapid pace. As this gap continues to widen, Canadians continue to face important questions involving the social, legal and ethical issues involving newly developed technologies. Canadians are concerned with how these technologies will impact society as they are faced with the situation of technology developing at a faster pace than the issues they raise can be addressed. Many people are beginning to wonder if the federal government is doing its part to develop policies that will protect and promote human dignity and rights, ensure the health and safety of all Canadians and protect the best interests of concerned individuals. Is the government taking the initiative to protect individuals from the harmful developments in reproductive technology?
In order to understand how the government is addressing the issues of reproductive technologies, it is important to discuss how these issues are viewed by society. The inability to have one's own biological children is the key demand of couples that require the use of reproductive technologies. Some Canadians feel that infertility is a dysfunction of the body and should be regarded as a medical condition (http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/english/nrgt/chapt-3.pdf). Other Canadians define infertility as a social condition because they believe the desire to have children results from the social pressure placed on married couples, particularly women, to bear children (http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/english/nrgt/chapt-3.pdf). In an effort to allow infertile couples to produce their own biological children, new reproductive technologies are being introduced.
The government has taken steps to encourage and regulate technological development while ensuring that the values of society are maintained. The Royal Commission on New Reproductive Technologies is developing federal policies to regulate the scientific advancement of technologies by developing standards, licensing laws, information registries, health surveillance, and enforcement and compliance. However, Canadians are still confronted with important questions about the limitations of technological research and the legal issues raised by new reproductive technologies.
One of the main objectives that need to be addressed by the government is how to protect reproductive materials outside the body and protect individuals by making sure they give permission for their materials to be used. Consent plays a key factor in medical research due to the fact that failure to receive consent violates the principles of individual independence and respect for others.
In kilner’s case study “Having a baby the new-fashioned way”, present a story that can be relatable to a lot of families struggling to have a child. This is a dilemma that can be controversial and ethical in own sense. The couple that were discussed in the case study were Betty and Tom. Betty and Tom who are both in their early forties who have struggled to bear children. Dr. Ralph Linstra from Liberty University believes that “Fertility can be taken for granted”. Dr. Ralph talks about how many couples who are marriage may run into an issue of bearing a child and turn to “medical science” to fix the issue. He discusses that “God is author of life and he can open and close the womb”. That in it’s self presents how powerful God.
A recent Court of Appeal ruling looked at preimplantation and IVF selection and how it was possibly going to be prohibited in the UK. Therefore, there are many factors that need to be discussed to whether or not it should be outlaw...
To begin, the ownership of the tissue should belong to the person until removed from the body with consent or no, which greatly complicates the issue. To illustrate, the instance where Dr. Jones at John Hopkins took samples of Henrietta's cervix tumor to use for cancer research by George Guy was a situation in which should be justified as the best course of action Dr. Jones took (53). Not only did the tissue taken provide the medical world a vital resource for research and study, but also it failed to have any negative effects on the deceased owner, Henrietta Lacks, yet many people found it as questionable. Moreover, the abuse of tissues taken from patients cannot be ignored such as the Moore v. Regents of the University of California Moore sued because he did not want the commercialization of his tissue and his doctor, Golde, did not inform him of the financial potential of his tissue before requesting consent; however, these abuses have demonstrated that the lack of “informed consent” when requesting tissue dona...
...ns and the ethical and moral beliefs behind the issue will again challenge the control of many governments in their role in human reproduction.
There has been some ethical issues surrounding the development and use of technology, that would consist of some advancements, such as “when in vitro fertilization is applied in medical practice and leads to the production of spare embryos, the moral question is what to do with these embryos” (Shi & Singh, 2008, p. 182). As for ethical dilemmas that comes into play with “gene mapping of humans, genetic cloning, stem cell research, and others areas of growing interest to scientist” (Shi & Singh, 2008, p. 182). “Life support technology raises serious ethical issues, especially in medical decisions regarding continuation or cessation of mechanical support, particularly when a patient exists in a permanent vegetative state” (Shi & Singh, 2008, p. 182). Health care budgets are limited throughout this world, making it hard for advancements yet even harder to develop the advancements with restraints. Which brings us back to the “social, ethical, and legal constraints, public and private insurers face the problem deciding whether or not to cover novel treatments” 188. Similarly what was mentioned before the decisions about “new reproductive techniques such as intracytoplasmic sperm injection in vitro fertilization (ICSIIVF), new molecular genetics predictive tests for hereditary breast cancer, and the newer drugs such as sildenafil (Viagra) for sexual dysfunction” (Giacomini, 2005).
...hnology. The Pandora’s Box of human germ-line engineering does appear beautiful from outside but if opened, many negative health and economic consequences can be unleashed. An international ban of human germ-line engineering is required to keep this technology under control.
What do one think of when they hear the words “Designer Babies”? A couple designing their own baby of course, and it’s become just that. Technology has made it possible for there to be a way for doctors to modify a babies characteristics and its health. Genetically altering human embryos is morally wrong, and can cause a disservice to the parents and the child its effecting.
For many years in Canada and many other countries abortion has been a topic of debate. In Canada, there has been no legislation regarding abortions since 1988 as the previous laws were said to violate women’s Charter rights under Section 7 which states that Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice. Due to this, the Supreme Court of Canada considered abortion legislation to be a violation of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Since then, no legislations regarding abortion has been changed. Joyce Arthur, executive director of the Abortion Rights Coalition
In 2000 the United Nations Populations Fund (UNFPA) defined reproductive rights as "the basic rights of couples and individuals to decide freely and responsibly the number, spacing and timing of their children; to have the information and means to do so; and to have the right to make decisions concerning reproduction, free of discrimination, coercion or violence."[1] Traditionally society defines reproductive rights in the context of one's being able to make decisions about his or her own reproduction; other individuals, unrelated to that person, were not considered as being involved in the decision. With the onset of in vitro fertilization (IVF) in 1978, reproductive processes have become more complicated. For example, in gestational surrogacy a surrogate mother, not genetically related to the embryo, is brought into the process of reproduction. This technique allows infertile couples to carry a child or children in the womb of a carrier, rather than in the womb of the biological mother.[2] As a result of this ethically controversial technology, society must modify its reproductive rights. In vitro fertilization (IVF) alone will not solve people's reproductive problems and protect everybody's rights. Society, therefore, must distinguish whose rights-the rights of biological parents or those of the surrogate mothers-should be protected.
As a young adult, it may seem foolish to predict what your future family life will look like, especially in regards to children. Often times this reality is forced upon a select few, particularly homosexual couples; however, with the innovation of in vitro fertilization (IVF), a couple is met with promise and the hope of a successful family life. IVF can be described as a process by which a fetus is genetically formed in a laboratory setting. Though this process may seem unnatural in essence, it allows for a more diverse family arrangement through medical innovation. This procedure, though controversial, is seen by many as an advancement in the medical field and can be accredited to procuring a healthy child for an unfortunate family, whether
"Reproductive Technologies." Bioethics for Students: How Do We Know What’s Right?, edited by Steven G. Post, vol. 1, Macmillan Reference USA, 1999. Opposing Viewpoints in
Throughout history, human beings have struggled to achieve control over nature. Now, in the twentieth century, with all of the scientific advances in computers and medicine, humans have come closer than ever to reaching this ultimate goal. However, along with the benefits of these new and rapidly increasing scientific advancements come moral, ethical and social issues that need to be given consideration. The Computer Revolution has not only vastly improved communication and produced amazing amounts of information, but has raised questions of human rights, privacy and social implications. While medical research has achieved medical benefits not even conceivable in the past, it has also raised major ethical and moral issues. Humans must consider all of these things when making decisions or judgments about human control over nature.
Science is creating a world where human life is no longer a beautiful miracle but a manufactured and carefully structured design, where the entirety of a person is hand picked and selected by someone else. By genetically engineering a persons life, we are altering what it means to be a human and creating an entirely different world for humanity. In a world of all designer humans, which is defined as any person whose genetics have been modified for purpose of enhancement, the word humanity will be obsolete. Today, we find that reproduction is making a rapid shift from the bedroom to the laboratory (Tuhus-Dubrow 2007). Modern science is consistently challenging what it means to be human and is making these designer babies much
Surrogacy is becoming extremely popular as a way for people to build their families and women to have a source of income. Many people have various reasons for their opposition to it whether it be by comparing it to prostitution or disagreeing with how military wives take advantage of the Tricare insurance. Lorraine Ali states in her article “The Curious Lives of Surrogates” that one of the more popular reasons to oppose surrogacy is that it contradicts, “what we’ve always thought of as an unbreakable bond between mother and child.” However, a woman’s inability to conceive her own children does not determine the absence of a mother to child bond.
Bioethics is a reflection of controversial moral choices or decisions pertaining to medical and healthcare fields. There have always been ethical standards in healthcare handed down within each profession. Although ethical decisions of the past were followed without question, bioethics today is constantly debated among those in the medical field, the general public, and those in governmental positions. Technological advances within the last century have opened the door to discussion about the ethics surrounding the last medical and technological advances. The decisions are influenced by culture, religion, philosophy, and personal preference. Bioethical decisions are always open for questioning. It is even possible for issues to be ethical during one decade and upon review, deemed unethical several years later. It is the job of the medical community and the public to question these issues, debate them, and accept or reject them. Although there have been hundreds of people who have influenced bioethics through their technological advances, Sir Robert Edwards’ invitro- fertilization techniques have changed the way many women today can become a mother.