The Right to a Child

The Right to a Child

1. Utilitarianism

   • Utilitarianism is interested in the greater good.
     • Utilitarians ask what the outcomes of infertility treatments are.
       • They would balance the pleasure of having a baby against the anguish of unsuccessful treatments.
         • Bentham's Hedonic Calculus could be used here.
           • His theory said that it was more important to avoid pain than bring about pleasure, so he would be concerned with the high failure rate of treatments like IVF.
             • However, the immense pleasure of having a baby could outweigh the pain of an unsuccessful IVF treatment.
   • Utilitarians give very different answers to questions about infertility treatments because they are are consequentialist.

2. Kantian Ethics

   • Kant is interested in the 'good will', a will that does the right thing regardless of the outcome.
     • He would not be interested in the agony of childlessness.
       • To find out what the right thing is, Kant would firstly universalise a maxim, turning it into a universal law. He would then ask whether that law was a contradiction of the will (an imperfect duty) or a self-contradiction (a perfect duty).
         • IVF involves destroying spare embryos.
           • This is not self-contradictory - you could have a universal law that said all spare embryos are destroyed.
             • However, it would be a contradiction of the will, because if you truly make it a universal law, it could have been you who was destroyed.
               • It would be contrary to your will to have been destroyed as an embryo.
         • Sperm, egg and embryo donation (whether paid or unpaid) might not be contrary to the will.
           • For example, in a case where one couple has IVF paid for if they donate some eggs to another couple who are infertile - we may think this is a perfectly acceptable situation.
             • However, Kant says we should never be used 'merely as a means to an end'. Even if donation is voluntary, a sperm or egg donor is using their own humanity as a means to an end. Kant would particularly be against the sale of sperm or eggs.
               • Some Kantians may argue that, if they are being paid, a donor is not being used merely as a means to an end. However, this view does not represent the spirit of Kant's theory.

3. Natural Law

   • Reproduction is one of the five primary precepts of Natural Law.
     • One of the reasons why God made humans, according to Aquinas, was to reproduce - that was their purpose.
     • However, although reproduction is an essential aspect of human nature, Natural Law requires that we follow deontological principles, the secondary precepts that derive from the primary precepts.
       • Precepts such as 'Do not kill' are absolute - there are no exceptions.
         • Therefore it would be wrong to break one precept to fulfil another.
   • Natural Law sees the destruction of embryos in IVF as completely wrong.
     • It also views the involvement of a third party (such as in egg, sperm or embryo donation, as an attack on the sanctity of marriage.
       • One primary precept is that we should live in an ordered society. If people are going around with two fathers or mothers, the structure of society is threatened.
         • Being a biological parent is seen as very significant, and not something that can be hidden from a child.
           • In some cases, this does cause a lot of problems and uncertainty as to the level of responsibility, commitment and involvement that a biological parent should have.

4. Situation Ethics

   • It seems very clear that in some cases, when a couple are desperate to have a child, infertility treatments can fulfil the needs, wishes and hopes of many couples. This seems very much to be the most loving thing.
     • Is it the most pragmatic thing though?
       • If IVF only works for every fourth or fifth couple, does the benefit for the minority outweigh the heartache for the unsuccesful couples?
         • Situation ethics does not give a clear answer. Situationists would not be against destroying embryos in principle. The real consideration is whether IVF and other procedures are really in the best interests of the couples involved.