Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ectogenesis and the Ethics of New Reproductive Technologies for Space Exploration

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Transhumanism: Entering an Era of Bodyhacking and Radical Human Modification

Part of the book series: The International Library of Bioethics ((ILB,volume 100))

Abstract

It is often argued that for human settlements to be established off-world we will first need a form of artificial gestation to promote population growth. This chapter considers practical and ethical benefits of embracing ectogenesis technology, both on Earth and for space exploration. It considers the common conflation of artificial gestation with other emerging reproductive technologies, such as cloning and genetic engineering, before considering how ectogenesis might promote the transhumanist agenda, radically destabilising traditional views of family and what makes us human.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Alghrani, A. 2018. Regulating assisted reproductive technologies: New horizons. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Blaber, E., H. Marçal, and B.P. Burns. 2010. Bioastronautics: The influence of microgravity on astronaut health. Astrobiology 10 (5): 463–473.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, P. 2020. Institutions and governance in an AI world: Transhuman relations. Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bostrom, N. 2005. A history of transhumanist thought. Journal of Evolution and Technology 14 (1): 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bostrom, N. 2003. Transhumanist values. In Ethical issues for the 21st century, ed. Adams, F. Virginia: Philosophical Documentation Center Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burdett, M., and V. Lorrimar. 2019. Creatures bound for glory: Biotechnological enhancement and visions of human flourishing. Studies in Christian Ethics 32 (2): 241–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, D.S. 2009. The parental investment factor and the child’s right to an open future. The Hastings Center Report 39 (2): 24–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher, D.-J. 2014. Transhuman perfection: The eradication of disability through transhuman technologies. Humana. Mente Journal of Philosophical Studies 26: 79–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fukuyama, F. 2002. Our posthuman future: Consequences of the biotechnology revolution. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham, E. 2016. Manifestations of the posthuman in the postsecular imagination. In Perfecting human futures: Transhuman visions and technological imaginations, ed. H. Tirosh-Samuelson and J.B. Hurlbut, 51–69. Switzerland: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. 2018. The future of human nature. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haldane, J.B.S. 1923. Daedalus, or Science and the future. London: Kegan Paul Trench Trubner & Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hellström, M., R.R. El-Akouri, C. Sihlbom, B.M. Olsson, J. Lengqvist, H. Bächdahl, et al. 2014. Towards the development of a bioengineered uterus: Comparison of different protocols for rat uterus decellularization. Acta Biomaterialia 10 (12): 5034–5042.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Humanity+ (formerly the World Transhumanist Association). 2009. The transhumanist declaration. https://humanityplus.org/philosophy/transhumanist-declaration/. Accessed 1 Oct 2020.

  • Kendal, E. 2017. The perfect womb: Promoting equality of (fetal) opportunity. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 14: 185–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kendal, E. 2020. Biological modification as prophylaxis: How extreme environments challenge the treatment/enhancement divide. In Human enhancements for space missions: Lunar, Martian, and future missions to the outer planets, ed. K. Szocik, 35–45. Switzerland: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kingma, E., and S. Finn. 2020. Neonatal incubator or artificial womb? distinguishing ectogestation and ectogenesis using the metaphysics of pregnancy. Bioethics 34 (4): 354–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koplin, J.J., and E. Kendal. 2020. Ethical issues in uterine transplantation. Korean Journal of Transplantation 34 (2): 78–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacKay, K. 2020. The ‘tyranny of reproduction’: Could ectogenesis further women’s liberation? Bioethics 34 (4): 346–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mann, V., A. Sundaresan, and M. Chaganti. 2019a. Cellular changes in the nervous system when exposed to gravitational variation. Neurology India 67 (3): 684–691.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mann, V., A. Sundaresan, S.K. Mehta, B. Crucian, M.F. Doursout, and S. Devakottai. 2019b. Effects of microgravity and other space stressors in immunosuppression and viral reactivation with potential nervous system involvement. Neurology India 67 (2): S198-203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marchant, G. E., and A. López. 2012. The (in)feasibility of regulating enhancement. In Building better humans: Refocusing the debate on transhumanism. ed. H. Tirosh-Samuelson and K. L. Mossman, 255–269. Frankfurt: Peter Lang GmbH.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marušič, U., R. Meeusen, R. Pišot, and V. Kavcic. 2014. The brain in micro- and hypergravity: The effects of changing gravity on the brain electrocortical activity. European Journal of Sport Science 14 (8): 813–822.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • More, M., and N. Vita-More. 2003. Principles of extropy, version 3.11.2003. Original version. The extroprian principles. Extropy 5(5). Available at www.extropy.org/principles.htm

  • Mossman, K. L. 2012. In sickness and in health: The (fuzzy) boundary between ‘therapy’ and ‘enhancement’. In Building better humans: Refocusing the debate on transhumanism, ed. H. Tirosh-Samuelson and K. L. Frankfurt Mossman, 229–254. Peter Lang GmbH.

    Google Scholar 

  • Otway, N., and M. Ellis. 2012. Construction and test of an artificial uterus for ex situ development of shark embryos. Zoo Biology 31 (2): 197–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parisi, David. 2016. What the surrogate touches: The haptic threshold of transhuman embodiment. Confero: Essays on Education, Philosophy and Politics 4: 77–96. https://doi.org/10.3384/confero.2001-4562.161218.

  • Partridge, E. A., M. G. Davey, M. A. Hornick, P. E. McGovern, A. Y. Mejaddam, and J. D. Vrecenak. et al. 2017. An extra-uterine system to physiologically support the extreme premature lamb. Nature Communications 8. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms15112

  • Pence, G. 1998. Who’s afraid of human cloning? Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, T. 2018. Imago Dei, DNA, and the transhuman way. Theology and Science 16 (3): 353–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pruchnic, J. 2016. Rhetoric and ethics in the cybernetic age: The transhuman condition. UK: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reardon, S. 2016. Human embryos grown in lab for longer than ever before. Nature News 533 (7601): 15–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Romanis, E.C. 2022. Assisted gestative technologies. Journal of Medical Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2021-107769.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandel, M. 2007. The case against perfection: Ethics in the age of genetic engineering. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, P., and D. Wells. 2006. Ectogenesis. In In ectogenesis: Artificial womb technology and the future of human reproduction, ed. S. Gelfand and J. Shook, 9–26. New York: Rodopi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smajdor, A. 2007. The moral imperative for ectogenesis. Cambridge Quarterly Healthcare Ethics 16 (3): 336–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, G. P. II. 1983. Intimations of immortality: Clones, cyrons and the law. U.N.S.W. Law Journal 6: 119–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, Kelly C., and Caleb Hylkema. 2020. “Who’s afraid of little green men? Genetic enhancement for off-world settlements”. In Human Enhancement for Space Missions: Lunar, Martian, and future missions to the outer planets, ed. K. Szocik, 217–27. Switzerland: Springer, 2020.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steiger, E. 2010. Not of woman born: How ectogenesis will change the way we view viability, birth, and the status of the unborn. Journal of Law and Health 23: 143–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Szocik, K., and T. Wójtowicz. 2019. Human enhancement in space missions: From moral controversy to technological duty. Technology in Society 59: 101–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szocik, K., R. Campa, M. Boone Rappaport, and C. Corbally. 2019. Changing the paradigm on human enhancements: The special case of modifications to counter bone loss for manned Mars missions. Space Policy 48: 68–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tirosh-Samuelson, H., and J. B. Hurlbut. 2016. Introduction: Technology, utopianism and eschatology. In Perfecting human futures: Transhuman visions and technological imaginations, ed. T. Tirosh-Samuelson and J. B. Hurlbut, 1–28. Switzerland: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uri, J.J., and C.P. Haven. 2005. Accomplishments in bioastronautics research aboard International Space Station. Acta Astronautica 56: 883–889.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walters, W.A.W. 1982. Cloning, ectogenesis, and hybrids: Things to come? In Test-tube babies: A guide to moral questions, present techniques and future possibilities, ed. W.A.W. Walters and P. Singer, 110–118. Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhu, Y., and C. Zhang. 2016. Prevalence of gestational diabetes and risk of progression to type 2 diabetes: A global perspective. Current Diabetes Reports 16 (1): 7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

    Evie Kendal

Authors
  1. Evie Kendal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Evie Kendal .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Bioethics and Health Humanities, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX, USA

    Emma Tumilty

  2. Boonshoft School of Medicine, Wright State University, Dayton, OH, USA

    Michele Battle-Fisher

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Kendal, E. (2022). Ectogenesis and the Ethics of New Reproductive Technologies for Space Exploration. In: Tumilty, E., Battle-Fisher, M. (eds) Transhumanism: Entering an Era of Bodyhacking and Radical Human Modification. The International Library of Bioethics, vol 100. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-14328-1_12

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation