REPRODUCTIVE ETHICS

The best possible child

Michael Parker

Correspondence to:
Correspondence to:
Professor M Parker
The Ethox Centre, Department of Public Health, University of Oxford, Gibson Building/Block 21, Radcliffe Infirmary, Woodstock Road, Oxford OX2 6HE, UK; michael.parker{at}ethox.ox.ac.uk

Julian Savulescu argues for two principles of reproductive ethics: reproductive autonomy and procreative beneficence, where the principle of procreative beneficence is conceptualised in terms of a duty to have the child, of the possible children that could be had, who will have the best opportunity of the best life. Were it to be accepted, this principle would have significant implications for the ethics of reproductive choice and, in particular, for the use of prenatal testing and other reproductive technologies for the avoidance of disability, and for enhancement. In this paper, it is argued that this principle should be rejected, and it is concluded that while potential parents do have important obligations in relation to the foreseeable lives of their future children, these obligations are not best captured in terms of a duty to have the child with the best opportunity of the best life.

Abbreviations: PGD, preimplantation genetic diagnosis

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Article

In defence of Procreative Beneficence

Julian Savulescu
J. Med. Ethics 2007 33: 284-288. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Bredenoord, A.L., Dondorp, W., Pennings, G., De Die-Smulders, C.E.M., De Wert, G. (2008). PGD to reduce reproductive risk: the case of mitochondrial DNA disorders. Hum Reprod 23: 2392-2401 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Savulescu, J. (2007). In defence of Procreative Beneficence. J. Med. Ethics 33: 284-288 [Full Text]