Article Text
Abstract
In this article, I critique the commonly accepted distinction between commercial and altruistic surrogacy arrangements. The moral legitimacy of surrogacy, I claim, does not hinge on whether it is paid (‘commercial’) or unpaid (‘altruistic’); rather, it is best determined by appraisal of virtue-abiding conditions constitutive of the surrogacy arrangement. I begin my article by problematising the prevailing commercial/altruistic distinction; next, I demonstrate that an assessment of the virtue-abiding or non-virtue-abiding features of a surrogacy is crucial to navigating questions about the moral legitimacy of surrogacy; in the final part, I reject other moral heuristics that might be proposed as alternatives to the commercial/altruistic dichotomy, and reiterate that a virtue-ethical framework is the most suitable way forward.
- Surrogate Mothers
- Reproductive Medicine
- Ethics
Data availability statement
No data are available. Not applicable.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Commercial surrogacy: how provisions of monetary remuneration and powers of international law can prevent exploitation of gestational surrogates
- Taming the international commercial surrogacy industry
- So not mothers: responsibility for surrogate orphans
- Altruistic surrogacy: the necessary objectification of surrogate mothers
- The surrogacy trade: proliferating bans and an opportunistic industry raise a worrying health risk
- Gay men's experiences of surrogacy clinics in India
- Surrogacy and the law in the UK
- Should uterus transplants be publicly funded?
- Interpretations, perspectives and intentions in surrogate motherhood
- Uterus transplantation: ethical and regulatory challenges