Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-nr4z6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-02T11:43:07.709Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Feminists on the Inalienability of Human Embryos

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 March 2020

Carolyn McLeod  and
Françoise Baylis
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The feminist literature against the commodification of embryos in human embryo research includes an argument to the effect that embryos are “intimately connected” to persons, or morally inalienable from them. We explore why embryos might be inalienable to persons and why feminists might find this view appealing. But, ultimately, as feminists, we reject this view because it is inconsistent with full respect for women's reproductive autonomy and with a feminist conception of persons as relational, embodied beings. Overall, feminists should avoid claims about embryos’ being inalienable to persons in arguments for or against the commodification of human embryos.

Type
Research Article
Information
Hypatia , Volume 21 , Issue 1: Special Issue: Maternal Bodies , Winter 2006 , pp. 1 - 14
Copyright
Copyright © 2006 by Hypatia, Inc.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baier, Annette. 1985. Postures of the mind: Essays on mind and morals. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Bartky, Sandra Lee. 1990. Narcissism, femininity, and alienation. In Femininity and domination: Studies in the phenomenology of oppression. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Brison, Susan J. 1997. Outliving oneself: Trauma, memory, and personal identity. In Feminists rethink the self, ed. Meyers, Diana Tietjens. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Cohen, Cynthia. 1999. Selling bits and pieces of humans to make babies: “The gift of the magi” revisited. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 24 (3): 288–306.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dickenson, Donna. 2001. Property and women's alienation from their own reproductive labour. Bioethics 15 (3): 205–17.10.1111/1467-8519.00232CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dodds, Susan. 2003. Women, commodification, and embryonic stem‐cell research. In Biomedical ethics reviews: Stem cell research, ed. Humber, James and Almeder, Robert F.Totowa, N.J.: Humana Press.Google Scholar
Donchin, Anne. 1996. Feminist critiques of new fertility technologies: Implications for social policy. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 21 (5): 475–98.10.1093/jmp/21.5.475CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Holland, Susan. 2001. Contested commodities at both ends of life: Buying and selling gametes, embryos, and body tissues. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 11 (3): 263–84.10.1353/ken.2001.0025CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mackenzie, Catriona. 1992. Abortion and embodiment. Australian Journal of Philosophy 70 (2): 136–55.10.1080/00048409212345041CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mackenzie, Catriona, and Stoljar, Natalie eds., 2000. Relational autonomy: Feminist perspectives on autonomy, agency, and the social self. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Marquis, Don. 1989. Why abortion is immoral. Journal of Philosophy 86 (4): 183–202.10.2307/2026961CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marx, Karl. 18671954. Capital. Trans. Moore, Samuel and Aveling, Edward, ed. Engels, Frederick. Moscow: Progress.Google Scholar
Meyers, Diana Tietjens. 1989. Self, society, and personal choice. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Meyers, Diana Tietjens. ed. 1997. Feminists rethink the self. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Nussbaum, Martha C. 1992. Human functioning and social justice: in defense of Aristotelian essentialism. Political Theory 20 (3): 202–46.10.1177/0090591792020002002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Radin, Margaret Jane. 1996. Contested commodities: The trouble with trade in sex, children, body parts, and other things. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Scheman, Naomi. 1983. Individualism and the objects of psychology. In Discovering reality: Feminist perspectives on epistemology, metaphysics, methodology, and philosophy of science, ed. Harding, Sandra and Hintikka, Merrill B.Boston: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
Sherwin, Susan. 1998. A relational approach to autonomy in health care. In The politics of women's health: Exploring agency and autonomy, ed. Feminist Health Care Ethics Research Network. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Tooley, Michael. 1972. Abortion and infanticide. Philosophy and Public Affairs 2: 37–65.Google Scholar
Young, Iris Marion. 1990. Pregnant embodiment. In Throwing like a girl and other essays in feminist philosophy and social theory. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar