| Summary: | Any ethical argument involving the problems of access to assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs) should entail the discussion of the decision protocol and consider the individual deliberating on the appropriateness of these remedies from the point of view of self and community. Yet, arguments based on patients' own moral calculations are rare in the bioethics literature. The moral voice behind most discourses concerning ARTs is that of an outwardly independent spectator, who nonetheless proceeds to justify a personally significant worldview in the utilization of these resources. Investigators grounded in social and legal sciences have offered relevant arguments in this regard, but because their discourses are derived from research protocols specific to their respective disciplines, they fail to provide a general rationale applicable to moral deliberation. === Fortunately, it is possible to bring two seemingly incongruous discourses, one from ethics and the other from economics, under the rubric of a more general model of utilization of ARTs. Specifically, the basic principles of a certain economic perspective, political economy, appear largely reconcilable with those of a particular ethical perspective, ethic of care. This ethical perspective is based on the premise that healthcare givers, simultaneously cognizant of the larger decisional environment as well as the contingencies specific to the immediate client-agent interaction, are sympathetic and responsive to their patients' unique needs. This moral precept finds a direct reflection in a contemporary strand of political economy represented by Richard Posner, Amitai Etzioni, Harold Hochman, and Amartya Sen. === The objective of this work is to blend the political economic perspective with that of an ethic of care by means of a patient-oriented model of demand for ARTS. The political economic paradigm of subjective valuation, substantially enhanced with the key elements provided by ethic of care, will offer an operational framework within which the preferences of seekers of ARTS can be analyzed in more satisfactory terms. The integration of the two perspectives requires the surmounting of a series of methodological hurdles, but the effort will be worthwhile. For, the model of choice will be conducive to an equilibrium that is not only efficient, but also equitable.
|
|---|
