Article Text
Abstract
In the name of safeguarding public interests and ethical principles, China’s National Health Commission bans unmarried women from using assisted reproductive technology (ART), including egg freezing. Supported by local governments, the ban has restricted single women’s reproductive rights nationwide. Although some courts bypassed the ban to allow widowed single women to use ART, they have not adopted a position in favour of single women’s reproductive autonomy, but quite the contrary. Faced with calls to relax the ban and allow single women to freeze eggs electively, the National Health Commission refused to amend their policy, partly to protect women’s well-being paternalistically and partly to implement the central government’s policies to boost the birthrate and maintain traditional family structures. While the government’s concerns about elective egg freezing are not entirely unfounded, they have failed to demonstrate that banning single women’s egg freezing is a suitable, necessary and proportionate means to safeguard societal interests and ethical principles. The authority’s assumptions that women cannot make rational decisions for their health even with adequate informed consent procedures, that banning egg freezing by single women promotes a culture of having children ‘at a proper age’, and that egg freezing by single women offends China’s public moralities have not been substantiated.
- Human Rights
- Women's rights
- Public Policy
- Legislation
- Ethics- Medical
Data availability statement
All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as online supplemental information.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Data availability statement
All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as online supplemental information.
Footnotes
Contributors Study conception, data collection and draft preparation: HW is the guarantor of the study.
Funding This study was funded by National Social Science Fund of China (20CFX043).
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- How can China tackle its declining fertility rate?
- Just another reproductive technology? The ethics of human reproductive cloning as an experimental medical procedure
- Latent class analysis of Chinese healthcare providers’ attitudes towards oocyte cryopreservation: a cross-sectional study
- Assisted reproductive technologies and equity of access issues
- A little bit pregnant: towards a pluralist account of non-sexual reproduction
- Fertility preservation in women with early-stage gynecologic cancer: optimizing oncologic and reproductive outcomes
- Egg freezing for non-medical uses: the lack of a relational approach to autonomy in the new Israeli policy and in academic discussion
- Live birth and adverse birth outcomes in women with ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease receiving assisted reproduction: a 20-year nationwide cohort study
- What would an environmentally sustainable reproductive technology industry look like?
- Marital status, living arrangement and mortality: does the association vary by gender?