L4 The Moral Status of the Embryo Flashcards
Why consider moral status of the embryo? (4)
unresolved moral debates over significance and status of human embryos
views on this link to other issues e.g. abortion
these debates political as well as personal, national and individual
this area of science is rapidly expanding - new issues arising e.g. mitochondrial transplant, IVF
Issues discussed in the Warnock report 1984 and what it led to
ethical status of emerging reproductive technologies (first IVF 1978)
donation, freezing, and use of eggs, embryos, sperm
surrogacy
research
recommended the current 14 day limit of research on embryos
led to the 1990 Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act
What is moral status?
an entity has moral if it or its interests morally matter to some degree for the entity’s own sake
Utilitarian moral status definition
Having moral status means that one’s interests (extent, duration of pleasures/pains etc) must be factored into the utility calculations of other people/society as a whole.
Non-utilitarian moral status definition
Having moral status means that there are reasons, independent of the consequences, for treating an entity with respect, and acting in its interests.
Points on the continuum
conception => individuation => primitive streak => quickening => security of pregnancy => viability => birth => personhood
Account 1: Biological humanity
We have moral status because we are HUMAN
but
Not just human DNA - every individual cell in our bodies would qualify
‘Moment of conception’? - that ‘moment’ is lengthy and complex
Warnock’s ‘twinning argument’ - justification for 14 day limit of research
Account 2: Personhood
Mary Elizabeth Warren
Persons have:
- sentience
- rationality
- capacity for more agency
- language
Embryos lack these features
Problem: could exclude many we might want to say have membership of the moral community - quite a high standard for moral status
Account 3: Interests
Joel Feinberg
‘Interest principle’: rights are intended to protect interests - rights holders must therefore be capable of having interests of their own
Interests = having a stake in things
To have interests an equity must be sentient = the capacity for having experiences of any kind
An embryo cannot be sentient - no NS thus no awareness/experience
Future like ours
Don Marquis
According to Marquis, the interest view fails because it cannot explain why killing a person in a temporary coma is wrong
-they lack sentience, so apparently lack interest. But we don’t think killing them is moral
While are embryo or foetus cannot take interest in anything, it does have an interest in lining out its future
Murder is wrong because it deprives the victim of their future
BUT unlike an embryo, we can have interests which should be respected even if we aren’t fully conscious of them - the interest view does not require permanent, conscious awareness of our interests
Does an embryo have moral status according to the 4 accounts
Human biology - Yes
Personhood - No
Interests - No
Future like ours - questionable
Mitochondrial donation
Three person baby
A response to mitochondrial disease
Recently made legal in the UK - 2015
Perspectives on mitochondrial donation
Future generations - mitochondrial transplant will affect children of the babies born as a result of donation
Designer babies
Religious opposition due to destruction of ‘donor’ embryos
Concern over ‘rushed’ vote
Cost - is a right to be pregnant/have genetically related children?
Argument in favour of mitochondrial donation
Robert Winston
Transfusing mitochondria is not unlike transfusing red blood cells
Government limit for having an abortion
24 weeks
