Ethical Reproductive Technologies

Ethics of reproductive technologies
Introduction
With most technological advances in the field of medicine, ethical considerations and concerns are formed. "Just because we can do something , should we do it?" This is a question that has plagued scientists in the last half of the twentieth century. The field of reproductive medicine in particular has faced this question-- perhaps more than any other field. For the first time in history, as an outgrowth of in vitro fertilization technology and research, the three components of parenthood - the genetic, the gestational, and the nurturant - can be separated, so that the loss of one does not necessarily result in the loss of the others.

For a man or woman who may not be able to conceive a
In addition, permitting sex selection, even in male dominated cultures could be positive, as it avoids the harm of compelling women to successive pregnancies until they have sons [9]. Even if a sex ratio imbalance does occur, some argue that this would serve to increase women’s value in the eyes of men [4]. It is also reasoned that parental autonomy and reproductive liberties are more important than equality [4,] [9], 0]. This technology allows medical professionals to aid the desires of couples with strong preferences for a particular sex- so why should they be denied if there is no demonstrable harm to others? [1] [5] There are potential psychological harms for the sex-selected offspring, as they might not live up to their parents’ high expectations [11]
.
Also, “shopping” for a particular sex devalues the dignity of children and their wellbeing [7]. It is proposed that they are effectively being used as a means to gratify their parents [12] and that moral and family dimensions are more important than consumer choice [13]. Children should not be accepted or rejected because of their sex- they should be loved unconditionally [10] [3]. Some believe that parents should not be granted inappropriate control of non-essential characteristics [14], as they could lose sight of the pleasure of children [11]

Designer
I believe that parents are acting in the best interests of their child by having a second child to save the first. PGD could also be used to enable parents to choose superficial characteristics such as eye colour, intelligence, beauty and so on [1]. This practice is highly controversial, as it would mean that children could become primarily valued according to the attractiveness of their expected characteristics [1]. It could also prevent the child from developing its own personality and identity, and they would be burdened with living up to the standards they were “designed” to meet [1] [16]

It is feared that selection of certain favourable traits will lead to discrimination and stigmatisation of people without those traits [1]. This could also damage the sense of self-worth and identity of disabled people, if they were viewed as “genetically inferior” [21] [22]. The expensive nature of PGD would mean that only wealthy people could afford it, so a “genetic overclass” would be established that had