First, from Scientific American: Turning the tables on obesity and BMI: When more can be better. “While obese and unhealthy people suffer from the highest mortality, people with normal BMI can also be quite unhealthy and be near the upper … Continue reading
“A telehealth service gives free medical advice to Well, your product, company and compensation plan are meaningless until you find a way to obtain your customers and business builders, right? The problem is that 97% of network marketers fail to … Continue reading
Biomonitoring is a technique for assessing exposures to chemical substances in the body through testing blood, urine, semen, amniotic fluid, breast milk, saliva, hair, and fingernails and other human tissues. Examples of chemicals that can be tested for include lead, … Continue reading
This commentary was initially posted on August 16, 2013 on the Impact Ethics blog and is reposted here with permission of the authors. Visit impactethics.ca
Stephen Wilkinson and Eve Garrard respond to Alana Cattapan’s blog post calling for the continuing prohibition on embryo sex selection.
______________________________________________________________________
Alana Cattapan raises many important questions about our objections to the current legal prohibition on embryo sex selection within IVF (not sex-selective abortion), in the UK and other relevantly similar countries. We are grateful for this opportunity to comment.
Law and Morality: Our report, Eugenics and the Ethics of Selective reproduction, isn’t about the ethics of IVF sex selection per se, but about the defensibility of a legal prohibition on IVF sex selection. We hold that, while some instances of sex selection are morally problematic, the case in favour of a ban is insufficiently strong. Using the powers of the state to impose legal restrictions on people’s reproductive behaviour is a serious, and potentially dangerous, business and something to be done cautiously and only for compelling reasons. Sometimes there are such reasons – we don’t support an entirely laissez-faire position – but, in the case of sex selection, a conclusive case hasn’t been made. We don’t claim that sex selection is desirable, or even that most cases of it are morally acceptable. Our conclusion is just that the case for legal prohibition is insufficiently strong to overturn the presumption of reproductive freedom.
Continue readingLast week, late night talk show host Jimmy Fallon announced the birth of his daughter, Winnie, via a surrogate. Fallon reports struggling with infertility as a couple for 5 years, and is (understandably) over the moon for his daughter: “…if … Continue reading
This commentary was initially posted on August 13, 2013 on the Impact Ethics blog and is reposted here with permission of the author. Visit impactethics.ca
Alana Cattapan argues the harm done to women through sex selection is sufficient reason to continue the prohibition.
In a recent report on “Eugenics and the Ethics of Selective Reproduction,” published in July 2013, Stephen Wilkinson and Eve Garrard step into much-contested terrain, challenging orthodoxies of pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD). In their essay on sex selection—which caught the attention of media outlets throughout the United Kingdom (here, here & here) —the authors argue that there is no ethical justification for the UK prohibition on sex selection using PGD.
Continue readingPeter Singer writes about “the world’s first cruelty-free hamburger.” Physical activities stimulate the brain into releasing certain chemicals that will make you feel more get viagra without prescription happy and relaxed. This is why the cialis active physiatrist is the … Continue reading
If you are looking to be inspired or uplifted by today’s post….Well, let’s just say these two stories might not be what you are seeking. Instead of offering an analysis, I will just say this: With respect to the twenty-six … Continue reading
Image Credit: Carol Simpson
Recently, Craig Klugman wrote a thought-provoking blog entry over at bioethics.net on long-term care options for elderly persons. While humane ones do exist that are designed for human flourishing, such as a new chain of purpose-designed communities where elderly folks have access to developing new skills in the visual and performing arts, these are often very expensive.
More often, facilities which provide in-patient nursing care still significantly “warehouse” their residents, providing medical care but treating the elderly as people waiting for death rather than persons who can still grow and learn and contribute. National Public Radio has an ongoing investigative news series called “Home or Nursing Home: America’s Empty Promise to Give the Elderly and Disabled A Choice.” In that series, NPR reporters chronicle many of the same kinds of difficulties Klugman discusses in his blog entry. Long-term care facilities have notoriously high staff turnover rates, in part due to difficult working conditions but also due to low pay. In-home careworkers are similarly poorly paid. 90% of these direct care workers are women, and earn an average of approximately $17,000/year. This is due in part to the fact that the federal law governing wage and overtime protections, the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), explicitly does not cover home care workers. Even facility-based care workers receive very little pay.
Continue readingThe Ridiculous Burka Avenger Backlash “Faiza S. Khan on why we should be praising the Pakistani cartoon superhero, not criticizing her clothing choices.” … Continue reading
In his July 11, 2014 Op-Ed piece in the New York Times, Nicholas Kristoff quotes The Lancet’s most recent nutritional survey as indicating that 804,000 children die annually from “suboptimal breast-feeding,” more than the WHO’s estimate of deaths from malaria. … Continue reading
Christine Overall insists that the well-being of children born of “surrogacy” arrangements should be of paramount importance and, most certainly, should take precedence over the wants of prospective parents. This commentary was initially posted on July 18, 2013 on the Impact Ethics blog and is reposted here with permission of the author. Visit impactethics.ca
“Surrogacy” is not illegal in Canada; paying or offering payment to a “surrogate” mother is. According to Section 6 (1) of the Assisted Human Reproduction Act (AHCR Act), “No person shall pay consideration to a female person to be a surrogate mother, offer to pay such consideration or advertise that it will be paid.” This prohibition notwithstanding, the plan is to permit reimbursement for legitimate (receipted) expenses. Section 12 (1) of the AHR Act stipulates, “No person shall, except in accordance with the regulations, … (c) reimburse a surrogate mother for an expenditure incurred by her in relation to her surrogacy.” As the relevant regulations have not been crafted, this exception to the legal prohibition is not yet in force. Meanwhile, there are many media reports of cases of paid and altruistic “surrogacy” in Canada (click here for more information).
Continue reading