Navigating conflicts of reproductive rights: Unbundling parenthood and balancing competing interests

Advances in assisted reproductive technologies can give rise to several ethical challenges. One of these challenges occurs when the reproductive desires of two individuals become incompatible and conflict. To address such conflicts, it is important to unbundle different aspects of (non)parenthood and to recognize the corresponding reproductive rights. This article starts on the premise that the six reproductive rights-the right (not) to be a gestational, genetic, and social parent-are negative rights that do not entail a right to assistance. Since terminating or continuing a pregnancy is a form of assistance, the right (not) to be a gestational parent should enjoy primacy in conflicts. However, while refusing assistance may hinder the reproductive project of another person, "prior assistance" does not entitle someone to violate a reproductive right. Therefore, our analysis provides reasons to argue that someone has a right to unilaterally use cryopreserved embryos or continue the development of an entity in an extracorporeal gestative environment (i.e., ectogestation). Although this could lead to a violation of the right not to be a genetic parent, it does not necessarily entail a violation of the right not to be a social parent.

Reconceiving Reproduction: Removing "Rearing" From the Definition-and What This Means for ART

The predominant position in the reproductive rights literature argues that access to assisted reproductive technologies (ART) forms part of an individual's right to reproduce. On this reasoning, refusal of treatment by clinicians (via provision) violates a hopeful parent's reproductive right and discriminates against the infertile. I reject these views and suggest they wrongly contort what reproductive freedom entitles individuals to do and demand of others. I suggest these views find their origin, at least in part, in the way we define "reproduction" itself. This paper critically analyses two widely accepted definitions of human reproduction and demonstrates that both are fundamentally flawed. While the process of reproduction includes the biological acts of begetting and bearing a child, I argue that it does not extend to include rearing. This reworked definition has little impact in the realm of sexual reproduction. However, it has significant ethical implications for the formulation and assignment of reproductive rights and responsibilities in the non-sexual realm in two important ways. First, a claim to access ART where one has an intention to rear a child (but does not beget or bear) cannot be grounded in reproductive rights. Second, lacking an intention to rear does not extinguish the reproductive rights and responsibilities for those who collaborate in the process. I conclude that clinicians collaborate in non-sexual reproduction at the point of triggering conception (begetting) and therefore have the right to refuse to be involved in non-sexual reproduction, in some instances, as do all reproductive collaborators.

What is Known About Reproductive Autonomy Among Justice-Involved Black Women?: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVE

There are approximately 231,000 women detained daily within the nation's jail and prison systems with women of color making up nearly half of those experiencing incarceration. The purpose of this scoping review was to synthesize the literature on the reproductive autonomy of Black women influenced by incarceration, using the three tenets of reproductive justice.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, CINAHL, SocINDEX, and PsycINFO for research related to reproductive justice written in English and published in the United States from 1980 to 2022. A review of 440 article titles and abstracts yielded 32 articles for full-text review; nine articles met inclusion.

RESULTS

Eight addressed Tenet 1; five mentioned Tenet 2; none addressed Tenet 3. Recognition of the influence of incarceration on the reproductive autonomy of Black women is limited.

CONCLUSION

The findings from this review suggest a need to address (a) reproductive choice, (b) support goals, and (c) support of justice-involved Black women.

Abortion Rights after Artificial Wombs: Why Decriminalisation is Needed Ahead of Ectogenesis

Significant scientific progress has been made toward artificial womb technology, which would allow part of human gestation to occur outside the body. Bioethical and legal scholars have argued that artificial wombs will challenge defences of abortion based in arguments for protecting bodily autonomy, for a pregnant person could have the foetus transferred to an artificial womb instead of being terminated. Drawing on examples from the common law jurisdictions of Canada, the USA, and the UK, I assess three ways scholars have argued abortion might be defended after ectogenesis (through redefining foetal viability, through a property right, and through a right to avoid genetic parenthood). I argue that while each of these proposals has strategic merit, each has significant legal and ethical limitations. Taking the normative position that abortion will remain a vital healthcare resource, I make the case for protecting abortion rights from a challenge posed by ectogenesis by focusing on decriminalisation.

Wrongful genetic connection: neither blood of my blood, nor flesh of my flesh

The use of reproductive techniques and the eventual reproductive negligence from the provider of reproductive services gave rise to situations in which the intended parents are deprived of raising a child genetically connected to them. Courts have been dealing with cases of those for years, but have systemically denied claimants (the prospective parents) compensation, failing to recognise as damage the loss of genetic connection. In 2017, for the first time, the Singapore High Court provided compensation for that damage, labelled "loss of genetic affinity" (ACB v Thomson Medical Pte Ltd and Others [2017] SGCA 20). This paper will argue that the damage in question is the loss of genetic connection (wrongful genetic connection) and results from a violation of reproductive rights (and eventually also the right to found a family) because a key element of reproductive rights is to have children with whom we keep a genetic bond and raise them. The paper will explain why the arguments classically argued against such compensation are unfounded and it will argue for a compensation covering both patrimonial and non-patrimonial damages.

Rethinking "Elective" Procedures for Women's Reproduction during Covid-19

Common hospital and surgical center responses to the Covid-19 pandemic included curtailing "elective" procedures, which are typically determined based on implications for physical health and survival. However, in the focus solely on physical health and survival, procedures whose main benefits advance components of well-being beyond health, including self-determination, personal security, economic stability, equal respect, and creation of meaningful social relationships, have been disproportionately deprioritized. We describe how female reproduction-related procedures, including abortion, surgical sterilization, reversible contraception devices and in vitro fertilization, have been broadly categorized as "elective," a designation that fails to capture the value of these procedures or their impact on women's overall well-being. We argue that corresponding restrictions and delays of these procedures are problematically reflective of underlying structural views that marginalize women's rights and interests and therefore threaten to propagate gender injustice during the pandemic and beyond. Finally, we propose a framework for triaging reproduction-related procedures during Covid-19 that is more individualized, accounts for their significance for comprehensive well-being, and can be used to inform resumption of operations as well as subsequent restriction phases.

The problem with reproductive freedom. Procreation beyond procreators' interests

Reproductive freedom plays a pivotal role in debates on the ethics of procreation. This moral principle protects people's interests in procreative matters and allows them discretion over whether to have children, the number of children they have and, to a certain extent, the type of children they have. Reproductive freedom's theoretical and political emphasis on people's autonomy and well-being is grounded in an individual-centred framework for discussing the ethics of procreation. It protects procreators' interests and significantly reduces the permissible grounds for interference by third parties. In this article I show that procreative decisions have far-reaching effects on the composition and size of the population. The upshot of considering these effects allows for the appreciation of the inadequacy of a framework that solely considers individual (i.e. procreators') interests to discuss the ethics of procreation. To address such inadequacy, I assess costs and benefits of past and present proposals to reflect on procreation in such a way as to consider its far-reaching effects. I conclude by arguing that reproductive freedom should be defended as an imperfect but instrumentally necessary tool. This framing would enable those participating in debates on the ethics of procreative decisions to work towards an ethical framework that accounts for the cumulative effects of these decisions.

Drawing the line on in vitro gametogenesis

In vitro gametogenesis (IVG) might offer numerous research and clinical benefits. Some potential clinical applications of IVG, such as allowing opposite-sex couples experiencing infertility to have genetically related children, have attracted support. Others, such as enabling same-sex reproduction and solo reproduction, have attracted significantly more criticism. In this paper, we examine how different ethical principles might help us to draw lines and distinguish between ethically desirable and undesirable uses of IVG. We discuss the alleged distinction between therapeutic and non-therapeutic uses of assisted reproduction in the context of IVG, and show how it is both problematic to apply in practice and theoretically dubious. We then discuss how the ethical principles of reproductive justice and beneficence apply to IVG for opposite-sex reproduction, same-sex reproduction, and solo reproduction. We suggest that these principles generate strong reasons for the use of IVG for opposite-sex and same-sex reproduction, but not for solo reproduction.

Upsetting the balance on sex selection

It is widely assumed that the strongest case for permitting non-medical sex selection is where parents aim at family balance. This piece criticizes one representative attempt to justify sex selection for family balance. Kluge (2007) assumes that some couples may seek sex selection because they hold discriminatory values, but this need not impugn those who merely have preferences, without evaluative commitments, for a particular sex. This is disputed by those who see any sex selection as inherently sexist because it upholds stereotypes about the sexes. This article takes an alternative approach. I argue that, even if we accept that preference-based selection is unobjectionable, a policy permitting selection for family balancing does a poor job of distinguishing between value-based and preference-based selection. If we wish to permit only preference-based sex selection we should seek to identify parents' motives. If we wish to justify a family balancing policy, other arguments are needed.

The aims of expanded universal carrier screening: Autonomy, prevention, and responsible parenthood

Expanded universal carrier screening (EUCS) entails a population-wide screening offer for multiple disease-causing mutations simultaneously. Although there is much debate about the conditions under which EUCS can responsibly be introduced, there seems to be little discussion about its aim: providing carrier couples with options for autonomous reproductive choice. While this links in with current accounts of the aim of foetal anomaly screening, it is different from how the aim of ancestry-based carrier screening has traditionally been understood: reducing the disease burden in the population. The reasons why the aim of EUCS is presented in terms of 'autonomy' rather than 'prevention' have not been spelled out in the literature. This paper seeks to fill this gap by considering the morally relevant similarities and dissimilarities between foetal anomaly screening, ancestry-based carrier screening and EUCS. When carrier screening is performed in the prenatal period, enhancing autonomy appears the most appropriate aim of EUCS, as the alternative of 'prevention through selective abortion' would urge women to terminate wanted pregnancies. However, when screening is conducted in the preconception period, carrier couples can avoid the birth of affected children by other means than selective abortion, for instance preimplantation genetic diagnosis. To the extent that this increased control over passing on a genetic disorder raises questions of parental responsibility, it seems necessary that the account of the aims of EUCS is wider than only in terms of enhancing reproductive autonomy.

Sexual and reproductive rights under attack: the advance of political and moral conservatism in Brazil

This article discusses political setbacks related to sexual and reproductive health and rights that have occurred in Brazil in the last 5 years (2014-2018) resulting from the significant role played by Christian (Evangelical and Catholic) parliamentarians in the legislative branch. Political initiatives aimed at prohibiting the affirmation of sexual and reproductive rights, while also curtailing debate about sexuality and gender in schools and universities, have raised "moral panic" within some elements of Brazilian society. The discursive strategies used around so-called "gender ideology" stimulated the formation of civil organisations which promote morality based on right-wing political positions. For this study, we looked at official documents and bibliographic material to examine how issues related to abortion rights, health care in cases of sexual violence, the prevention of sexually transmitted infections and homosexual citizenship are currently being suppressed, compromising the defence and advancement of the sexual and reproductive rights of women and the LGBTI+ population. The results point to the steady weakening of public policies that had become law in the 1980s, a time of Brazilian re-democratisation after two decades of military dictatorship. A wide range of civil, political and social rights, which saw significant growth and consolidation over the last 20 years, were rolled back after the resurgence of the extreme right wing in the federal legislature, culminating in the election of the current president in October 2018. However, social movements have increased in strength in the last few decades, especially the black feminist and LGBTI+ rights movements. These movements continue to provide political resistance, striving to affirm and protect all sexual and reproductive rights achieved to date.

Let us talk about eggs! Professional resistance to elective egg vitrification and gendered medical paternalism

In this paper, by applying a feminist bioethical perspective, we identify a new form of medical paternalism that still shapes contemporary legal policies on human egg cryopreservation performed without medical reasons. The fear of negligent, careless women who opt to delay their pregnancy for mere convenience is a widely known gender biased stereotype. Nevertheless, the opinions and judgments of medical professionals on this issue have not yet been sufficiently explored by in-depth research. In this essay, therefore, first we look at the broader bioethical, legal, and social aspects of human egg cryopreservation. In the second part of the paper we discuss a unique qualitative study conducted with professionals working at Hungarian IVF clinics. We argue, based on a bioethical analysis of the collected data, that when new reproduction technologies provide opportunities for women to widen their range of reproductive choices, the traditional forms of medical paternalism can be reinforced by gendered paternalism, as well. We identify several elements of gendered paternalism that characterized the attitudes of the IVF staff and discuss the professionals' resistance to elective egg freezing and vitrification of eggs for the future. We conclude by suggesting directions for future policy. Although we focus on the Hungarian case in this paper, we are aware that similar attitudes can be observed in some other countries where this technology has become available and requested by women, but where they also face difficulties in their access to it.

Dealing with treatment and transfer requests: how PGD-professionals discuss ethical challenges arising in everyday practice

How do professionals working in pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) reflect upon their decision making with regard to ethical challenges arising in everyday practice? Two focus group discussions were held with staff of reproductive genetic clinics: one in Utrecht (The Netherlands) with PGD-professionals from Dutch PGD-centres and one in Prague (Czech Republic) with PGD-professionals working in centres in different European countries. Both meetings consisted of two parts, exploring participants' views regarding (1) treatment requests for conditions that may not fulfill traditional indications criteria for PGD, and (2) treatment and transfer requests involving welfare-of-the-child considerations. There was general support for the view that people who come for PGD will have their own good reasons to consider the condition they wish to avoid as serious. But whereas PGD-professionals in the international group tended to stress the applicants' legal right to eventually have the treatment they want (whatever the views of the professional), participants in the Dutch group sketched a picture of shared decision-making, where professionals would go ahead with treatment in cases where they are able to understand the reasonableness of the request in the light of the couple's reproductive history or family experience. In the international focus group there was little support for guidance stating that welfare-of-the child considerations should be taken into account. This was different in the Dutch focus group, where shared decision-making also had the role of reassuring professionals that applicants had adequately considered possible implications for the welfare of the child.

Reproductive function: the protection of the rights of the people which are sent to the area of the fighting

OBJECTIVE

Introduction: The issues of problems of the legal regulation of posthumous reproduction in Ukraine and foreign countries are analysis in the article. The author substantiates the necessity in the creation and acceptance of the State Program of the retrieval of reproductive cells in people who are sending to the area of the fighting. The aim:the purpose of our work is a comprehensive study of post-mortem (post-mortem) reproduction and substantiation of the possibility and necessity of adopting a state program for the selection of reproductive cells of individuals who are sent to a combat zone to ensure their full social protection and assistance in the realization of the right to fatherhood or motherhood.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Materials and methods: the experience of certain countries is analyzed in the research. Additionally, we used statistical data of international organizations, conclusions of experts and foreign legal acts dealing with posthumous reproduction and auxiliary reproductive technologies, judicial practice, doctrinal ideas and views on this issue.

RESULTS

Review: there are medical (practical) preconditions for the introduction of posthumous reproduction programs. Among them is the technology of obtaining reproductive cells (post-mortem too), their preservation and successful subsequent use. In addition, foreign experience shows the success of the application of these technologies and the real guarantee of full implementation of the range of rights to the family, fatherhood or maternity.

CONCLUSION

Conclusions: we note the urgent need to develop and adopt a state reproductive cell selection program for individuals who are sent to the combat zones (according to a model that exists in such countries as the USA and Israel).

Reproductive Rights without Resources or Recourse

The U.S. Supreme Court declared procreation to be a fundamental right in the early twentieth century in a case involving Oklahoma's Habitual Criminal Sterilization Act, an act that permitted unconsented sterilization of individuals convicted of certain crimes. The right that the Court articulated in that case is a negative right: it requires that the government not place unjustified roadblocks in the way of people seeking to procreate, but it does not require the government to take positive steps to help people procreate if they wish to. I argue that a positive legal right is morally necessary in the United States, given the profound significance of procreation, the current barriers to access to care, and the related issues of individual and societal justice. I assume at the outset that the right to procreate should be expansive enough to include a right to noncoital reproduction. The absence of a positive right to procreate reflects not just constitutional tradition but also a governmental and societal commitment to a longstanding set of reproductive hierarchies by which those who fall outside of the traditional framing of family too frequently find their procreative dreams hindered. Reconceiving procreative rights to include a positive right would create greater opportunities to argue and lobby for increased access to technologies that are out of reach for many.

[Epidemiology and human rights: Zika virus outlook and reproductive rights in Latin America]

With this article we review the current Zika virus (ZIKV) epidemic. We also look back over the last scientific evidence relating ZIKV to microcephaly and Guillain-Barré syndrome. Finally, we also address the challenges in terms of reproductive rights in Latin America.

Public health agencies' obligations and the case of Zika

This article focuses on the initial reactions to the Zika epidemic by national and international public health agencies. It presents and analyzes some responses public officials made about sexual and reproductive health at the inception of the epidemic. It also describes the different challenges and obligations faced by local and international public health agencies, as these have not been clearly outlined. The article argues that these agencies have different obligations and should fulfill them despite existing obstacles. While international agencies should honor their leadership role and make recommendations at a meta-level, local agencies should provide, in the case of Zika, a framework for empowerment and grant women the freedom to achieve sexual and reproductive health so that they can avoid the consequences of this epidemic.

First, do no harm: Generalized procreative non-maleficence

New reproductive technologies allow parents some choice over their children. Various moral principles have been suggested to regulate such choices. This article starts from a discussion of Julian Savulescu's Principle of Procreative Beneficence (PPB), according to which parents ought to choose the child expected to have the best quality of life, before combining two previously separate lines of attack against this principle. First, it is suggested that the appropriate moral principles of guiding reproductive choices ought to focus on general wellbeing rather than prioritizing that of the child and, second, that they ought to be non-maximizing (e.g. seeking the 'good enough' or to avoid harm). Though neither of these suggestions is entirely novel, combining them results in a new, and arguably more plausible, principle to regulate procreative choices, which I call the Principle of Generalized Procreative Non-Maleficence (PGPNM). According to this principle, the primary obligation on parents is not to cause harm to other people through their reproductive choices.

Nurse Perspectives on Referrals for Oncology Patients to Reproductive Endocrinologists: Results of a Learning Activity

BACKGROUND

Although concern about future fertility for adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer is high, referrals to reproductive endocrinologists (REI) are low. Oncology nurses are well positioned to facilitate these referrals but may lack the knowledge and training. This report describes a learning activity in the Educating Nurses about Reproductive Issues in Cancer Healthcare (ENRICH) program whereby oncology nurses interviewed REIs.

METHOD

Participants were instructed to conduct an interview with an REI using a semistructured guide and provided a written report of the discussion. We examined responses to each question using qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

Seventy-seven participants across 15 states provided a summary. Learner summaries highlighted four themes related to FP, including Cost, Time, Lack of Information or Referrals, and Learning About Available Options.

CONCLUSION

Oncology nurses have an opportunity for a partnership to ensure that concerns about fertility among AYA patients are addressed. J Contin Educ Nurs. 2016;47(8):376-384.

Abortion rights judgment: a ray of hope!

While granting a prisoner the right to abort her foetus, a recent Bombay High Court judgment recognised a woman's absolute right to abortion. This article discusses the judgment in detail and the bioethical debates over abortion rights. It deals with the restrictions imposed by the law not only on when the foetus can be aborted, but also who can get the abortion done and in what circumstances.

[Medical, ethical and legal issues in cryopreservation of human embryos]

Embryo cryopreservation improves efficiency and security of assisted reproduction techniques. Nonetheless, it can be questionable, so it must be justified from technical, legal and ethical points of view. This article analyses these perspectives. Embryo cryopreservation maximizes the probability of pregnancy, avoids new ovary stimulations and reduces the occurrence of multiple gestations. There is consensus that the in vitro embryo deserves legal protection by its own, although not as a newborn. Very few countries prohibit embryo cryopreservation based on the legal duty to protect human life since fecundation. Those countries that allow it, privilege women's reproductive rights. In Chile and in Latin America, no laws have been promulgated to regulate human assisted reproduction. The moral status of the embryo depends on how it is considered. Some believe it is a potential person while others think it is just a group of cells, but all recognize that it requires some kind of respect and protection. There is lack of information about the number of frozen embryos and their final destination. As a conclusion the authors propose that women or couples should have the right to decide autonomously, while institutions ought to be clear in their regulations. And the legislation must establish the legal status of the embryo before its implantation, the couples' rights and the regulation of the embryo cryopreservation. Personal, institutional or legal decisions must assume a concept about the moral status of the human embryo and try to avoid their destruction or indefinite storage.

Reproductive 'surrogacy' and parental licensing

A serious moral weakness of reproductive 'surrogacy' is that it can be harmful to the children who are created. This article presents a proposal for mitigating this weakness. Currently, the practice of commercial 'surrogacy' operates only in the interests of the adults involved (the gestator and the commissioning individuals who employ her), not in the interests of the child who is created. Whether 'surrogacy' is seen as the purchase of a baby, the purchase of parental rights, or the purchase of reproductive labor, all three views share the same significant flaws. They endorse the transfer, for a fee, of the infant from the woman who gestated it to those who commissioned it, but without justifying such a transfer; they fail to demonstrate that the commissioners have any entitlement to the infant, or, for that matter, suitability to be the infant's parents; and they fail to take any notice of the infant's needs, interests, and wellbeing. A mere genetic connection is not enough to establish that the commissioners are entitled to receive the baby or that they are competent to raise it. Their good intentions, however caring, are not enough. Therefore, just as in the practice of adoption, there should be a formal institutionalized system for screening and licensing the prospective social parents, which would make the infant's needs, interests, and wellbeing paramount. I reply to several potential objections to this proposal, including the objection that genetic parents who raise their own child are not screened and licensed.

Assisted reproduction and distributive justice

The Canadian province of Quebec recently amended its Health Insurance Act to cover the costs of In Vitro Fertilization (IVF). The province of Ontario recently de-insured IVF. Both provinces cited cost-effectiveness as their grounds, but the question as to whether a public health insurance system ought to cover IVF raises the deeper question of how we should understand reproduction at the social level, and whether its costs should be a matter of individual or collective responsibility. In this article I examine three strategies for justifying collective provisions in a liberal society and assess whether public reproductive assistance can be defended on any of these accounts. I begin by considering, and rejecting, rights-based and needs-based approaches. I go on to argue that instead we ought to address assisted reproduction from the perspective of the contractarian insurance-based model for public health coverage, according to which we select items for inclusion based on their unpredictability in nature and cost. I argue that infertility qualifies as an unpredictable incident against which rational agents would choose to insure under ideal conditions and that assisted reproduction is thereby a matter of collective responsibility, but only in cases of medical necessity or inability to pay. The policy I endorse by appeal to this approach is a means-tested system of coverage resembling neither Ontario nor Quebec's, and I conclude that it constitutes a promising alternative worthy of serious consideration by bioethicists, political philosophers, and policy-makers alike.

"Let Me Keep My Dead Husband's Sperm": Ethical Issues in Posthumous Reproduction

The feasibility of posthumous reproduction when the surviving partner is female has brought to light many ethical, moral, social, and legal issues. This review aims to summarize these issues and to assist clinicians who may be faced with such requests. A question list, used for health technologies assessment, was utilized in a question-answer approach as the review methodology. Of the 1,208 publications identified through a comprehensive literature search in biomedical, psychological, and ethical databases, 31 articles included arguments related to one or more questions from the predefined question set. Key stakeholders identified include the deceased, the requesting party, the resultant child, the physician, and society. Key ethical issues relevant to posthumous reproduction include the four traditional pillars of medical ethics--autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, justice--as well as the stakeholders' rights and sociocultural attitudes. The ethical framework formulated by these issues has been incorporated in a clinical ethics decision-making tool that could prove useful to clinicians and decision makers.

Sleepwalking Into Infertility: The Need for a Public Health Approach Toward Advanced Maternal Age

In Western countries today, a growing number of women delay motherhood until their late 30s and even 40s, as they invest time in pursuing education and career goals before starting a family. This social trend results from greater gender equality and expanded opportunities for women and is influenced by the availability of contraception and assisted reproductive technologies (ART). However, advanced maternal age is associated with increased health risks, including infertility. While individual medical solutions such as ART and elective egg freezing can promote reproductive autonomy, they entail significant risks and limitations. We thus argue that women should be better informed regarding the risks of advanced maternal age and ART, and that these individual solutions need to be supplemented by a public health approach, including policy measures that provide women with the opportunity to start a family earlier in life without sacrificing personal career goals.

Transgenderism and reproduction

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The development of new reproductive medicine techniques creates opportunities for preserving fertility in transgender persons. Before, losing fertility was accepted as the price to pay for transitioning.

RECENT FINDINGS

The desire for children is present in many trans persons, as in the general population. Ethical concerns are sometimes raised against the preservation of fertility; however, the only unique aspect of this group is the gender transition of one of the parents. All other elements such as same sex parenthood, use of donor gametes, social stigma, etc., can be found in other groups of parents. Not all reproductive options for all trans persons are equal because not only the gametes are of importance, but also the sex of the (future) partner. In trans women, the best option to preserve gametes is cryopreservation of sperm by preference initiated before starting hormonal therapy. In trans men, donor sperm is most often used, but in theory, there are three options available to preserve fertility: oocyte banking, embryo banking and banking of ovarian tissue.

SUMMARY

Fertility is possible for both trans men and women, but it requires timely cryopreservation of gametes or stopping cross-sex hormones and possible fertility treatments which are costly and may be unpleasant. Centers should elucidate their policy and inform trans persons on the possibilities and limitations.

Conceptualising a child-centric paradigm : do we have freedom of choice in donor conception reproduction?

Since its inception, donor conception practices have been a reproductive choice for the infertile. Past and current practices have the potential to cause significant and lifelong harm to the offspring through loss of kinship, heritage, identity, and family health history, and possibly through introducing physical problems. Legislation and regulation in Australia that specifies that the welfare of the child born as a consequence of donor conception is paramount may therefore be in conflict with the outcomes. Altering the paradigm to a child-centric model, however, impinges on reproductive choice and rights of adults involved in the process. With some lobby groups pushing for increased reproductive choice while others emphasise offspring rights there is a dichotomy of interests that society and legislators need to address. Concepts pertaining to a shift toward a child-centric paradigm are discussed.

Sex selection and the procreative liberty framework

The practice of sex selection for social reasons has raised serious criticism. Advocates of this practice, however, insist that objections to it are unfounded and that legal bans are ethically unjustified. Usually, proponents use a rights-based liberal approach as the framework to evaluate this practice. Under this framework, reproductive choice is a basic freedom and interference with individuals' autonomous reproductive choices is illegitimate, unless their actions are shown to seriously harm others. As persuasive as this framework might be in relation to many aspects of reproduction, I argue that it is inappropriate when dealing with sex selection for social purposes.

[The right to human reproduction. Should surrogate maternity be allowed?]

Is addressed in this work if you can accept that in Spain a reproductive rights through the use of assisted reproductive techniques, especially when the client is a single woman and when the baby has undergone a substitution pregnancy or surrogacy, regardless of those who have come to this possibility, which still continues to be considered without any efficacy in the rules governing the matter.

Wrongs, preferences, and the selection of children: a critique of Rebecca Bennett's argument against the principle of procreative beneficence

Rebecca Bennett, in a recent paper dismissing Julian Savulescu's principle of procreative beneficence, advances both a negative and a positive thesis. The negative thesis holds that the principle's theoretical foundation - the notion of impersonal harm or non-person-affecting wrong - is indefensible. Therefore, there can be no obligations of the sort that the principle asserts. The positive thesis, on the other hand, attempts to plug an explanatory gap that arises once the principle has been rejected. That is, it holds that the intuitions of those who adhere to the principle are not genuine moral intuitions, but instead simply give voice to mere (non-moral) preferences. This paper, while agreeing that Savulescu's principle does not express a genuine moral obligation, takes issue with both of Bennett's theses. It is suggested that the argument for the negative thesis is either weak or question-begging, while there is insufficient reason to suppose the positive thesis true.

Preserving the right to future children: an ethical case analysis

We report on the case of a 2-year-old female, the youngest person ever to undergo ovarian tissue cryopreservation (OTC). This patient was diagnosed with a rare form of sickle cell disease, which required a bone-marrow transplant, and late effects included high risk of future infertility or complete sterility. Ethical concerns are raised, as the patient's mother made the decision for OTC on the patient's behalf with the intention that this would secure the option of biological childbearing in the future. Based on Beauchamp and Childress's principlism approach of respect for autonomy, nonmaleficence, beneficence, and justice, pursing OTC was ethically justified.