Ethics: use and misuse of assisted reproductive techniques across species
The boundaries of what we are able to do using ARTs are fast-moving. In both human and veterinary medicine, this presents a fundamental question: ‘Just because we can, should we?’ or, to rephrase the same question: ‘How can we distinguish between what is a use and a misuse of an ART, across species?...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Bioscientifica
2021-08-01
|
| Series: | Reproduction and Fertility |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://raf.bioscientifica.com/view/journals/raf/2/3/RAF-21-0004.xml |
| _version_ | 1819130308130242560 |
|---|---|
| author | Madeleine L H Campbell |
| author_facet | Madeleine L H Campbell |
| author_sort | Madeleine L H Campbell |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The boundaries of what we are able to do using ARTs are fast-moving. In both human and veterinary medicine, this presents a fundamental question: ‘Just because we can, should we?’ or, to rephrase the same question: ‘How can we distinguish between what is a use and a misuse of an ART, across species?’ This paper assesses the scientific evidence base for and against the use of ARTs and offers a personal opinion on how we can use such evidence to inform an ethical distinction between justifiable and unjustifiable uses of the techniques. It is argued that the law provides a necessary but insufficient basis for such distinctions. Based on the evidence about harms and benefits, ARTs may be classified into three groups: those which should be rarely used; those for which current evidence supports arguments both for and against their use and those which there is an ethical imperative to use. To which category a particular ART falls into varies depending upon the species to which it is being applied and the reason we are using it. In order to ensure that our ethical oversight keeps up with our technical prowess, the medical and veterinary professions should keep discussing and debating the moral basis of the use of ARTs, not only with each other but also with the lay public. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-22T08:57:33Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-d0d7331165ea42ac9fc784a4808e271c |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2633-8386 2633-8386 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-22T08:57:33Z |
| publishDate | 2021-08-01 |
| publisher | Bioscientifica |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Reproduction and Fertility |
| spelling | doaj.art-d0d7331165ea42ac9fc784a4808e271c2022-12-21T18:31:48ZengBioscientificaReproduction and Fertility2633-83862633-83862021-08-0123C23C28https://doi.org/10.1530/RAF-21-0004Ethics: use and misuse of assisted reproductive techniques across speciesMadeleine L H Campbell0Department of Pathobiology and Population Sciences, The Royal Veterinary College, Hawkshead Lane, South Mymms, UKThe boundaries of what we are able to do using ARTs are fast-moving. In both human and veterinary medicine, this presents a fundamental question: ‘Just because we can, should we?’ or, to rephrase the same question: ‘How can we distinguish between what is a use and a misuse of an ART, across species?’ This paper assesses the scientific evidence base for and against the use of ARTs and offers a personal opinion on how we can use such evidence to inform an ethical distinction between justifiable and unjustifiable uses of the techniques. It is argued that the law provides a necessary but insufficient basis for such distinctions. Based on the evidence about harms and benefits, ARTs may be classified into three groups: those which should be rarely used; those for which current evidence supports arguments both for and against their use and those which there is an ethical imperative to use. To which category a particular ART falls into varies depending upon the species to which it is being applied and the reason we are using it. In order to ensure that our ethical oversight keeps up with our technical prowess, the medical and veterinary professions should keep discussing and debating the moral basis of the use of ARTs, not only with each other but also with the lay public.https://raf.bioscientifica.com/view/journals/raf/2/3/RAF-21-0004.xmlethicsassisted reproductive techniquesreproductionveterinary ethicscomparative ethicsreproductive ethics |
| spellingShingle | Madeleine L H Campbell Ethics: use and misuse of assisted reproductive techniques across species Reproduction and Fertility ethics assisted reproductive techniques reproduction veterinary ethics comparative ethics reproductive ethics |
| title | Ethics: use and misuse of assisted reproductive techniques across species |
| title_full | Ethics: use and misuse of assisted reproductive techniques across species |
| title_fullStr | Ethics: use and misuse of assisted reproductive techniques across species |
| title_full_unstemmed | Ethics: use and misuse of assisted reproductive techniques across species |
| title_short | Ethics: use and misuse of assisted reproductive techniques across species |
| title_sort | ethics use and misuse of assisted reproductive techniques across species |
| topic | ethics assisted reproductive techniques reproduction veterinary ethics comparative ethics reproductive ethics |
| url | https://raf.bioscientifica.com/view/journals/raf/2/3/RAF-21-0004.xml |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT madeleinelhcampbell ethicsuseandmisuseofassistedreproductivetechniquesacrossspecies |