Artificial Reproduction, Assisted Reproduction, ethics for sale, eugenics, medical ethics, public policy, reproductive technology, research ethics

Whose life is it, anyway?

 

Trait selection in babies “is a service,” says Dr. Steinberg. “We intend to offer it soon.”

Whoops, someone noticed that some of this reproductive technology stuff might not be ethical.

Talk about controlling parents!

Eugenics is a done deal. The cat’s out of the bag. There’s no going back. (Don’t think about the 14th Amendment that overturned Dred Scot and took the slaves from their “owners.”)

Of course, the “Progressives” and human-plus groups only commit *good* eugenics. All they want is control and more money.

The “Progressives” started raising the alarm a couple of years ago, when they were pushing for a change in the Bush embryonic stem cell policy. The logic was that the reason there is no regulation is that the government isn’t paying for enough research.

At the same meetings, they were adamant that their group must have the power maintain control. (Alta Charo, Laurie Zoloth, Jonathan Moreno, Insoo Hyun and the rest of the “Ethicists for Hire” crowd.)

Funny, in all these links, I didn’t find a single comment about the doctors who lost a discrimination suit in California for refusing to fulfill a patient’s request for IVF — even in the midst of the hulabaloo about the mother of octuplets.

HT to Vox Popoli

About bnuckols

Conservative Christian Family Doctor, promoting conservative news and views. (Hot Air under the right wing!)

Discussion

One thought on “Whose life is it, anyway?

  1. >I don't see how Guadalupe Benitez is relivant. There is a huge difference between a doctor refusing treatment because it violates his religious or personal beliefs and a doctor refusing treatment because he concludes from his medical knowledge the the procedure is not in the interests of the patient.The cat is out of the bag indeed. The technology to do this has been available for years, but no clinic wished to break new ground and face the contriversy – not to mention the protests and politics. Once one has been at it for a while, and the initial surge of attention has died down, I'll expect many others to follow.Currently my concern is that well-meaning legislators, trying to stamp out cosmetic eugenics, may go too far and either deliberatly or inadvertantly prohibit forms of selection which are far less contriversial – selecting against serious diseases, or the common IVF practice of selecting the embryos most likely to survive for implantation.

    Posted by Suricou Raven | March 1, 2009, 2:25 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

If the post is missing: take the “www.” out of the url

@bnuckols Twitter

Categories

Archives

SiteMeter

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 919 other followers

%d bloggers like this: