It's really interesting how the Dr. redefines human reproduction as "abnormal" simply when you only have a one in five chance of getting pregnant each month. To me this seems very normal. If every sexual interaction resulted in conception, it seems like that would be abnormal (not to mention disastrous)!
I wonder what the stakes are when considering the ethics of reproductive technologies. It seems like when people are increasingly using fertility technologies and women will pay any cost to conceive a natural child, there are many questions that come into play. What happens to children in the adoptive/foster system? How invasive is too invasive when it comes to reproductive technologies? What questions do these technologies raise in light of overpopulation? It seems like there are no easy answers, but I don't think characeterizing human reproduction as "abnormal" seems to be a productive way to frame the conversation.
1 comment:
It's really interesting how the Dr. redefines human reproduction as "abnormal" simply when you only have a one in five chance of getting pregnant each month. To me this seems very normal. If every sexual interaction resulted in conception, it seems like that would be abnormal (not to mention disastrous)!
I wonder what the stakes are when considering the ethics of reproductive technologies. It seems like when people are increasingly using fertility technologies and women will pay any cost to conceive a natural child, there are many questions that come into play. What happens to children in the adoptive/foster system? How invasive is too invasive when it comes to reproductive technologies? What questions do these technologies raise in light of overpopulation? It seems like there are no easy answers, but I don't think characeterizing human reproduction as "abnormal" seems to be a productive way to frame the conversation.
Post a Comment