RESUMO
In this paper, we explore the ethical and legal implications of a hypothetical use of artificial gametes (AGs): that of taking a person's cells, converting them to AGs and using them in reproduction-without that person's knowledge or consent. We note the common reliance on genetic understandings of parenthood in the law and suggest that injustices may arise if unwitting genetic parents are sued for child support. We draw parallels between the hypothetical use of AGs to facilitate unwitting parenthood and real examples of unwitting parenthood following cases of sperm theft. We also look at the harm that might be caused by becoming a genetic parent, independently of financial obligations, and ask whether such harm should be understood in terms of theft of property. These examples help to highlight some of the current and prospective difficulties for the regulation of genetic and legal parenthood, and show how existing regulatory assumptions are likely to be further challenged by the development of AGs. We conclude by suggesting that the reliance on genetic connections to generate parental responsibility (financial or otherwise) for offspring is flawed and that alternative ways of establishing parental responsibility should be considered.
Assuntos
Pais , Técnicas de Reprodução Assistida/ética , Técnicas de Reprodução Assistida/legislação & jurisprudência , Espermatozoides , Criança não Desejada , Doação Dirigida de Tecido/ética , Feminino , Humanos , Recém-Nascido , Masculino , Obrigações Morais , Pesquisa com Células-Tronco/ética , Doadores de Tecidos/éticaRESUMO
Making treatment decisions for older people is difficult, because of the complex interplay of their multiple co-morbidities, but also because of the fine balance of risks vs. benefit in any chosen management plan. This becomes even more difficult when they lose the capacity to tell us what they want, and often in such situations we have to rely on information from others in order to make decisions based on their best interests. Advance care planning should help with making these decisions clearer, based on the documented preferences of what the patient would have wanted while capacity was still present. However, such documents are still very rarely used, and even if they are, health-care professionals are often wary of them for the multitude of ethical and legal problems that can arise.
