The best possible child
- 30 April 2007
- journal article
- editorial
- Published by BMJ in Journal of Medical Ethics
- Vol. 33 (5) , 279-283
- https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.2006.018176
Abstract
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.Keywords
This publication has 12 references indexed in Scilit:
- The welfare of the childHuman Fertility, 2005
- Deaf lesbians, “designer disability,” and the future of medicineBMJ, 2002
- Procreative Beneficence: Why We Should Select the Best ChildrenBioethics, 2001
- Women and Human DevelopmentPublished by Cambridge University Press (CUP) ,2000
- The disability rights critique of prenatal genetic testing. Reflections and Recommendations.1999
- The Choice to Have a Disabled ChildAmerican Journal of Human Genetics, 1999
- The Possibility of Social ChoiceAmerican Economic Review, 1999
- Choices and Rights: Eugenics, genetics and disability equalityDisability & Society, 1998
- Turkey-Baster Babies: The Demedicalization of Artificial InseminationThe Milbank Quarterly, 1991
- X-linked spondyloepiphyseal dysplasia tarda: clinical and linkage data.Journal of Medical Genetics, 1971