Article Text
Abstract
Ought parents, in general, to value being biologically tied to their children? Is it important, in particular, that both parents be biologically tied to their children? I will address these fundamental questions by looking at a fairly new practice within IVF treatments, so-called IVF-with-ROPA (Reception of Oocytes from Partner), which allows lesbian couples to ‘share motherhood’, with one partner providing the eggs while the other becomes pregnant. I believe that IVF-with-ROPA is, just like other IVF treatments, morally permissible, but here I argue that the increased biological ties which IVF-with-ROPA allows for do not have any particular value beside the satisfaction of a legitimate wish, because there is no intrinsic value in a biological tie between parents and children; further, I argue that equality within parental projects cannot be achieved by redistributing biological ties.
- Reproductive Medicine
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Fatherlessness, sperm donors and ‘so what?’ parentage: arguing against the immorality of donor conception through ‘world literature’
- Having a child together in lesbian families: combining gestation and genetics
- Using stem cell-derived gametes for same-sex reproduction: an alternative scenario
- The surrogacy trade: proliferating bans and an opportunistic industry raise a worrying health risk
- The value of being biologically related to one's family
- Lesbian motherhood and mitochondrial replacement techniques: reproductive freedom and genetic kinship
- Interpretations, perspectives and intentions in surrogate motherhood
- The meaning of synthetic gametes for gay and lesbian people and bioethics too
- Familial transmission of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in adoptees: a Swedish nationwide family study
- The misplaced embryo: legal parenthood in ‘embryo mix-up’ cases