The Humble Libertarian

Building a small army to take over the world and... leave everybody alone.

Saturday, April 14, 2012

Parents can have a duty to use IVF, say bioethicists

I always thought that the mental health profession was full of crazies but the bioethics profession reeks of Nazi style 'let's breed the perfect master race' horrors. Not too long ago prominent bioethicists suggested infanticide as a cure for culling the human race of undesirables (the sick, the slow and those babies/toddlers deemed otherwise defective). Now it's actually arguing that reproduction should only be allowed with government approved genetic material because reproducing the old fashion way is just too risky. They even have a name for it - "procreative beneficence". If you genes are deemed unworthy of reproduction, the bioethicists believe that the government will be doing you a favor by pre-selecting the genetic materials for your procreation.  I suspect the bioethics industry is a government subsidized horror factory that is nonetheless planning for the future of the New World Order.
When two Italian-Australian utilitarian bioethicists declared in the Journal of Medical Ethics that infanticide (or after-birth abortion) was morally permissible, they lit the fuse on a world-wide storm of condemnation. But a proposal which may be even more controversial has popped up in the April issue of the American Journal of Bioethics. Two bioethicists contend that some parents are morally obligated to use pre-implantation genetic diagnosis to create a healthy baby. Janet Malek, of East Carolina University, and Judith F. Daar, of Whittier Law School, in California, argue that eventually the law should and will impose “a duty on IVF-reproducing parents to maximize the well-being of their future offspring by all reasonable means.” Why? The authors cite three reasons: increasing the child’s well-being, expanding his or her self-determination, and reducing inequalities. If this reasoning evokes the notorious “after-birth abortion” article, this may be because the authors rely upon ground broken by Julian Savulescu, Guy Kahane and John Harris, three utilitarians working in Britain who influenced the authors of the previous article. The British bioethicists are pushing "procreative beneficence" -- the notion that parents should endow their baby with the best possible qualities. Malek and Daar argue that this is morally good not only because it has good consequences (ie, stronger, healthier, more intelligent kids) but it also promotes fairness and autonomy.
Read the rest here

Judy Morris,
Blogger, THL
| Website