Lessons of Reproductive Ethics for Principlism

This article brings together two debates in bioethics more substantively than has been the case until now. One is the methodological debate over "principlism," i.e., the theoretical framework for analyzing and solving (bio)ethical problems proposed by Beauchamp and Childress in Principles...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Morten Dige
Format: Article
Language:Danish
Published: Norwegian University of Science and Technology Library 2018-11-01
Series:Etikk i Praksis: Nordic Journal of Applied Ethics
Online Access:https://www.ntnu.no/ojs/index.php/etikk_i_praksis/article/view/2726
id doaj-cc7fac919084462f8c95545bbf34bb45
record_format Article
spelling doaj-cc7fac919084462f8c95545bbf34bb452020-11-24T21:59:56ZdanNorwegian University of Science and Technology LibraryEtikk i Praksis: Nordic Journal of Applied Ethics1890-39911890-40092018-11-0110.5324/eip.v13i1.2726Lessons of Reproductive Ethics for PrinciplismMorten Dige This article brings together two debates in bioethics more substantively than has been the case until now. One is the methodological debate over "principlism," i.e., the theoretical framework for analyzing and solving (bio)ethical problems proposed by Beauchamp and Childress in Principles of Biomedical Ethics (PBE). The other is the normative debate about reproductive ethics, i.e., procreative rights and obligations in a time of pervasive opportunities for making detailed choices about the properties and capacities of future people. The obvious point of bringing the debates together is to show how they can illuminate each other in fruitful ways consistent with the method of reflective equilibrium endorsed in PBE. Furthermore, discussions of reproductive ethics is almost absent in PBE, making it an interesting "test case" on how principlist theory can have an impact on and be affected by confrontations with new practices and considerations in biomedicine. Reproductive ethics is especially interesting due to the so-called non-identity considerations, which pose a challenge to common morality views on harm to and respect for persons. My focus is mainly on some methodological points about the import of concrete normative discussions for formulating basic normative principles. However, I unfold a number of substantial points in order to demonstrate this. It is my impression that most writers on principlism underestimate the effect of engaging with concrete problems. Specifically, I conclude that reflecting on procreative obligations provides strong reasons for specifying the basic principles in ways that uncover new dimensions of them and not just new applications. Key words: principlism, reproductive ethics, non-identity problem, nonmaleficence, respect for persons https://www.ntnu.no/ojs/index.php/etikk_i_praksis/article/view/2726
collection DOAJ
language Danish
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Morten Dige
spellingShingle Morten Dige
Lessons of Reproductive Ethics for Principlism
Etikk i Praksis: Nordic Journal of Applied Ethics
author_facet Morten Dige
author_sort Morten Dige
title Lessons of Reproductive Ethics for Principlism
title_short Lessons of Reproductive Ethics for Principlism
title_full Lessons of Reproductive Ethics for Principlism
title_fullStr Lessons of Reproductive Ethics for Principlism
title_full_unstemmed Lessons of Reproductive Ethics for Principlism
title_sort lessons of reproductive ethics for principlism
publisher Norwegian University of Science and Technology Library
series Etikk i Praksis: Nordic Journal of Applied Ethics
issn 1890-3991
1890-4009
publishDate 2018-11-01
description This article brings together two debates in bioethics more substantively than has been the case until now. One is the methodological debate over "principlism," i.e., the theoretical framework for analyzing and solving (bio)ethical problems proposed by Beauchamp and Childress in Principles of Biomedical Ethics (PBE). The other is the normative debate about reproductive ethics, i.e., procreative rights and obligations in a time of pervasive opportunities for making detailed choices about the properties and capacities of future people. The obvious point of bringing the debates together is to show how they can illuminate each other in fruitful ways consistent with the method of reflective equilibrium endorsed in PBE. Furthermore, discussions of reproductive ethics is almost absent in PBE, making it an interesting "test case" on how principlist theory can have an impact on and be affected by confrontations with new practices and considerations in biomedicine. Reproductive ethics is especially interesting due to the so-called non-identity considerations, which pose a challenge to common morality views on harm to and respect for persons. My focus is mainly on some methodological points about the import of concrete normative discussions for formulating basic normative principles. However, I unfold a number of substantial points in order to demonstrate this. It is my impression that most writers on principlism underestimate the effect of engaging with concrete problems. Specifically, I conclude that reflecting on procreative obligations provides strong reasons for specifying the basic principles in ways that uncover new dimensions of them and not just new applications. Key words: principlism, reproductive ethics, non-identity problem, nonmaleficence, respect for persons
url https://www.ntnu.no/ojs/index.php/etikk_i_praksis/article/view/2726
work_keys_str_mv AT mortendige lessonsofreproductiveethicsforprinciplism
_version_ 1725846304423149568