(in Polish) Procreative Ethics

elective seminars
general courses

Classroom

The seminar explores ethics of human procreation. Its primary goal is to provide students with conceptual, theoretical and methodological tools necessary to understand and analyze problems of procreative ethics. The course covers following topics: (1) ethics of new reproductive technologies; (2) ethics of prenatal testing and prenatal selection; (3) ethics of abortion.

The seminar explores ethics of human procreation. Its primary goal is to provide students with conceptual, theoretical and methodological tools necessary to understand and analyze problems of procreative ethics. Secondarily, it is designed to help students develop analytical and argumentative skills necessary for identifying, examining and resolving ethical dilemmas brought about by the advances in reproductive medicine.

The course covers following topics:

(1) ETHICS OF NEW REPRODUCTIVE TECHNOLOGIES

-- Nature of Human Procreation & New Reproductive Technologies

-- Gamete Donation

-- Surrogate Motherhood

-- Redefining the Family

-- Reproductive Cloning

-- Status of Human Embryos

(2) ETHICS OF PRENATAL TESTING AND PRENATAL SELECTION

-- Ethics of Prenatal Testing and Genetic Counseling

-- Prenatal Testing and Disability Rights

-- Genetic Selection

-- Procreative Responsibility

(3) ETHICS OF ABORTION

-- Abortion and Personhood

-- Abortion and the Right to Bodily Integrity

-- Abortion and the Interest Principle

-- Abortion and the FLO Argument

-- Abortion and the Golden Rule

These topics are analyzed mainly from an ethical perspective. However, since bioethics an interdisciplinary field, attention is paid to their medical, legal, political, and sociological aspects of human procreation as well. The course is conducted in a seminar format. It involves teaching methods such as short interactive lectures, students’ presentations, discussions, group works, text analyses, and case analyses.

(1) ETHICS OF NEW REPRODUCTIVE TECHNOLOGIES

-- Nature of Human Procreation & New Reproductive Technologies

Required readings: O. O’Neill, ‘Reproductive autonomy’ and new technologies, in: Autonomy and Trust in Bioethics, Cambridge University Press, 2002: 49-70.

Optional readings: J. Robertson, The Presumptive Primacy of Procreative Freedom, in: Idem, Children of Choice, Princeton University Press 1994: 22-42; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith; Dignitas Personae: On Certain Bioethical Questions, Rome 2008, sec. 1-21.

-- Gamete Donation

Required readings: M. Lyndon Shanley, Collaboration and Commodification in Assisted Procreation: Reflections on an Open Market and Anonymous Donation in Human Sperm and Eggs, Law & Society Review 2002 36(2): 257-284.

Optional readings: D. Callahan, Bioethics and Fatherhood, in: B. Steinbock (ed.), Legal and Ethical Issues in Human Reproduction, Ashgate Publishing Company, Burlington MA 2002: 241-252; B. Steinbock, Payment for egg donation, The Mount Sinai Journal of Medicine 2004 71(4): 255-265.

-- Surrogate Motherhood

Required readings: L.M. Purdy, Surrogate Mothering: Exploitation or Empowerment?, in: H. Kuhse, P. Singer (ed.), Bioethics: An Anthology, 2nd Ed., Blackwell Publishing, Oxford 2006: 90-99; S. Dodds, Jones K., A Response to Purdy, in: H. Kuhse, P. Singer (ed.), Bioethics: An Anthology, 2nd Ed., Blackwell Publishing, Oxford 2006: 100-103.

Optional readings: D. Satz, Markets in Women’s Reproductive Labor, Philosophy & Public Affairs 1992 21(2): 107-131; B. Steinbock, Surrogate Motherhood as Prenatal Adoption, in: B. Steinbock (ed.), Legal and Ethical Issues in Human Reproduction, Ashgate Publishing Company, Burlington MA 2002: 263-269.

-- Redefining the Family

Required readings: R. Maklin, Artificial Means of Reproduction and Our Understanding of the Family, „The Hastings Center Report” 1991 (21)1: 5-11.

Optional readings: A. Charo, And Baby Makes Three – Or Four, Or Five, Or Six: Redefining the Family After the Reprotech Revolution, in: B. Steinbock (ed.), Legal and Ethical Issues in Human Reproduction, Ashgate Publishing Company, Burlington MA 2002: 215-237 [or] B. E.S. Robinson, Birds do it. Bees do it. So why not Single Women and Lesbians, Bioethics 1997, 11 (3-4): 217-227; D. Cutas, Postmenopausal Motherhood: immoral, illegal? A Case Study, Bioethics 2007 21(8): 458-63.

-- Reproductive Cloning

Required readings: M. Tooley, The Moral Status of the Cloning of Humans, in: H. Kuhse, P. Singer (ed.), Bioethics: An Anthology, 2nd Ed., Blackwell Publishing, Oxford 2006: 162-77; The President's Council on Bioethics, Human Cloning and Human Dignity: An Ethical Inquiry, Washington, D.C. 2002: Chapter 5: The Ethics of Cloning-to-Produce-Children.

Optional readings: D. Birnbacher, Human Cloning and Human Dignity, Reproductive BioMedicine Online 2005 (10)1/Suppl./: 50-55; Kass L., Why we Should Ban Human Cloning, Texas Review of Law & Politics 1999 (4)1: 41-50.

-- Status of Human Embryos

Required readings: P. Singer, K. Dawson, IVF Technology and the Argument from Potential, Philosophy and Public Affairs, 1988 17(2): 87-104.

Optional readings: B. Smith, B. Brogaard, Sixteen Days, Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 2003 (23)1: 45-78; B. Steinbock, The Morality of Killing Human Embryos, The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 2006 34 (1): 26-34.

(2) ETHICS OF PRENATAL TESTING & PRENATAL SELECTION

-- Ethics of Prenatal Testing and Genetic Counseling

Required Readings: R. Wachbroit, D. Wasserman, Patient Autonomy and Value-Neutrality in Nondirective Genetic Counseling, „Stanford Law & Policy Review" 1994-1995, 6: 103-121.

Optional Readings: A. Lippman, Prenatal Genetic Testing and Screening: Constructing Needs and Reinforcing Inequities [in:] Steinbock B. (ed.), Legal and Ethical Issues in Human Reproduction (The International Library of Medicine, Ethics and Law), Ashgate Publishing Company, Burlington MA 2002, pp. 299-334.

-- Prenatal Testing and Disability Rights

Required Readings: A. Asch, E. Parens, The Disability Rights Critique of Prenatal Genetic Testing: Reflections and Recommendations, in: E. Parens, A. Asch (eds.), Prenatal Testing and Disability Rights, Georgetown University Press, Washington 2000: 3-43.

Optional Readings: B. Steinbock, Disability, Prenatal Testing and Selective Abortion, in: E. Parens, A. Asch (eds.), Prenatal Testing and Disability Rights, Georgetown University Press, Washington 2000: 108-123; L. Gillam, Prenatal Diagnosis and Discrimination Against the Disabled, Journal of Medical Ethics 1999, 25:163-171.

-- Genetic Selection

Required Readings: J.A. Robertson, Genetic Selection of Offspring Characteristics, Boston University Law Review 1996, 76: 421-482.

Optional readings: D.C. Wertz, J.C. Fletcher, Fatal Knowledge? Prenatal Diagnosis and Sex Selection, The Hastings Center Report 1989 19(3): 21-27.; R. McDougall, Acting Parentally: an Argument Against Sex Selection, Journal of Medical Ethics 2005, 31: 601-605. [or] D. King, Why We Should not Permit Embryos to be Selected as Tissue Donors, in: H. Kuhse, P. Singer (eds), Bioethics: An Anthology, 2nd Ed., Blackwell Publishing, Oxford 2006: 158-161; S. Sheldon, S. Wilkinson, Should Selecting Saviour Siblings be Banned?, „Journal of Medical Ethics” 2004 (3): 533-537. [or] D.S. Davis, Genetic Dilemmas and the Child's Right to an Open Future, The Hastings Center Report” 1997 (27)2: 7-15; M. Spriggs, Lesbian Couple Create a Child who is Deaf Like Them, Journal of Medical Ethics 2002 (28): 283.

-- Procreative Responsibility

Required Readings: B. Steinbock, Wrongful Life and Procreative Decisions, in: M. Roberts, D. Wasserman (eds), Harming Future Persons. Ethics, Genetics and the Nonidentity Problem. Springer, Dordrecht 2009: 155-178.

Optional readings: R. Bennett, J. Harris, Are there Lives not Worth Living? When is it Morally Wrong to Reproduce?, w: D. Dickenson (ed.) Ethical Issues in Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Cambridge 2002: 321-335.

(3) ETHICS OF ABORTION

-- Abortion and Personhood

Required readings: M.A. Warren, On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion, in: T.A. Mappes and D. DeGrazia (eds.), Biomedical Ethics, New York: McGraw-Hill, 4th edition1996: 434-440.

Optional readings: M.B. Mahowald, Person, in: W.T. Reich (ed.) Encyclopedia of Bioethics, New York 1995, vol. IV: 1934-1939; J. Fletcher, Indicators of Humanhood: A Tentative Profile of Man, The Hastings Center Report 1972 5(2): 1-4.

-- Abortion and the Right to Bodily Integrity

Required readings: J.J. Thomson, A Defense of Abortion, Philosophy and Public Affairs 1971 (1): 47-66.

Optional readings: B. Baruch, Thompson on Abortion, Philosophy and Public Affairs 1972 1(3): 335-340.

-- Abortion and Interest Principle

Required readings: M. Tooley, Abortion and Infanticide, Philosophy and Public Affairs 1972 (2)1: 37-65.

-- Abortion and the FLO Argument & the Golden Rule

Required readings: D. Marquis, Why Abortion is Immoral?, The Journal of Philosophy 1989, 4: 183-202.

Optional readings: R.M. Hare, Abortion and the Golden Rule, Philosophy and Public Affairs 1975 (4)3: 201-222; G. Sher, Hare, Abortion, and the Golden Rule, Philosophy and Public Affairs 1977 (6)2:184-190.

At the end of the course student:

KNOWLEDGE

‒ has knowledge and understanding of interdisciplinary concepts applied in contemporary discussions dealing with human procreation and beginning of life issues;

‒ is acquainted with the main ethical questions and problems of procreative ethics;

‒ has well-structured knowledge of main philosophical and normative approaches as well as main argumentation strategies used in contemporary discussions concerning procreative ethics;

‒ thoroughly appreciates the role of ethics in reproductive medicine;

‒ understands the importance of sociocultural, legal, political and economic factors in the practice and development of reproductive medicine.

SKILLS

‒ analyses texts and arguments dealing with the seminar subject;

‒ identifies, interprets and analyses problems and moral dilemmas related to the seminar subject;

‒ formulates sound argumentation, both factual and normative, and is able to defend his or her point of view;

‒ prepares oral presentations on the seminar subject;

‒ prepares written critical analyses of texts on the seminar subject;

‒ demonstrate an ability to communicate in English at B2+ level.

SOCIAL COMPETENCES

‒ appreciates the importance and value of discussions for the development of knowledge and solving of moral dilemmas dealing with human procreation and beginning of life issues;

‒ has ability to cooperate in a group;

‒ takes and initiates research activities, is able to plan and organise their course;

‒ is reliable, considerate and engaged in planning and carrying out research activities;

‒ identifies moral problems related to research activities and related to procreative ethics;

‒ values importance of ethical reflection for reproductive medicine

‒ is interested in new moral debates and disputes regarding the seminar subject

The final grade will be based on:

(1) ATTENDANCE AND ACTIVITY: insightful participation in the seminar discussions and class group works, demonstrating student’s knowledge and understanding of terminology, problems, precepts and arguments discussed, her familiarity with the assigned reading as well as her analytical, argumentative and communicative skills – 40%;

(2) ORAL PRESENTATION of a seminar topic, freely selected from the provided list, demonstrating student’s knowledge and understanding of the topic, her analytical and argumentative skills as well as her ability to develop and deliver effective oral presentation in English – 30%;

(3) WRITTEN CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF TEXT on a seminar topic, freely selected from the provided list – 30%

Attendance will be monitored on weekly basis. Two (2) absences are allowed per semester. Each class absence beyond the two allowed lowers the final grade by one full number grade (e.g. from 5 to 4, or from 4,5 to 3,5).

A ‘5’ grade will require consistent insightful participation in seminar discussions, drawing upon readings and personal experiences, as well as excellent oral presentation and written work demonstrating students’ mastery of the cases, terminology, precepts and principles discussed.

Final grades will be assigned on the following percentages:

100-90% – 5,0; 89-85% – 4,5; 84-75% – 4,0; 74-70% – 3,5; 69-60% – 3,0; 59-0% – 2,0