Skip to main content

The limitations of liberal reproductive autonomy

Abstract

The common liberal understanding of reproductive autonomy – characterized by free choice and a principle of non-interference – serves as a useful way to analyse the normative appeal of having certain choices open to people in the reproductive realm, especially for issues like abortion rights. However, this liberal reading of reproductive autonomy only offers us a limited ethical understanding of what is at stake in many kinds of reproductive choices, particularly when it comes to different uses of reproductive technologies and third-party reproduction. This is because the liberal framework does not fully capture who benefits from which reproductive options, the extent of the risks and harms involved in various reproductive interventions, and the reasons for why people are driven to make certain reproductive choices.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  • Anderson, R. A., M. C. Davies, and S. A. Lavery. 2020. Elective Egg Freezing for Non-Medical Reasons. BJOG 127 Scientific Impact Paper No 63: e113–e121. “.” ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Arora, K. S., and V. Blake. 2014. Uterus transplantation: ethical and regulatory challenges. Journal of Medical Ethics 40: 396–400. “.” ).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berkhout, Suze. 2012. Relational Autonomy on the Cutting Edge. The American Journal of Bioethics 12 (7): 59–61. “.” ( .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benedet, Susana. 2019. Uterus transplantation fact sheet. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 98 (9): 1205–1206. “.” ( .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blazier, Jaden, and Rien Janssens. 2020. Regulating the international surrogacy market:the ethics of commercial surrogacy in the Netherlands and India. Medicine Health Care and Philosophy 23: 621–630. “.” ).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, Susan B. 2010. Autonomy for Mothers? Relational Theory and Parenting Apart. Feminist Legal Studies 18: 137–158. “.” ).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Browne, Tamara. 2017. How sex selection undermines reproductive autonomy. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 14: 195–204. “.” ).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burrow, Sylvia. 2012. Feminism, Autonomy & Reproductive Technology. Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology 16 (1): 31–44. “.”, ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Catsanos, R., W. Rogers, and M. Lotz. 2013. The Ethics of Uterus Transplantation. Memoir - American Association Of Petroleum Geologists 27: 65–73. “.” ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Denbow, J. M., “Reproductive, and Autonomy. 2014. Counter-Conduct, and the Juridical. Constellations 21: 415–424. ” ).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Proost, Michiel, and Gily Coene. 2019. Women’s autonomy, reproductive justice, and social egg freezing. Tijdschrift voor Genderstudies 22 (4): 357–371. “.” ( .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donchin, A. 2009. Toward a Gender-Sensitive Assisted Reproduction Policy. Memoir - American Association Of Petroleum Geologists 23: 28–38. “.” ).

    Google Scholar 

  • El-Toukhy, T., S. Bhattacharya, and Akande and V.A.“Multiple Pregnancies Following Assisted Conception.” BJOG 2018 Scientific Impact Paper No. 22.

  • Fraser, Melissa E. Summer 1998. Gender Inequality in In Vitro Fertilization: Controlling Women’s Reproductive Autonomy. New York City Law Review 2 (2): 183–210. “.” ( .

    Google Scholar 

  • Goering, Sara. 2009. Postnatal reproductive autonomy: Promotional relational autonomy and self-trust in new parents. Memoir - American Association Of Petroleum Geologists 12 (1): 9–19. “.” ( .

    Google Scholar 

  • Gruben, Vanessa. 2017. Freezing as Freedom: A Regulatory Approach to Elective Egg Freezing and Women’s Reproductive Autonomy. Alberta Law Review 54 (3): 753–774. “.” ( .

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, J. A., and A. Richters. 2008. Embodied Subjects and Fragmented Objects: Women’s Bodies, Assisted Reproduction Technologies and the Right to Self-Determination. Bioethical Inquiry 5: 239–249. “.” ).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hester, D. 2002. Reproductive Technologies as Instruments of Meaningful Parenting: Ethics in the Age of ARTs. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 11 (4): 401–410. “.” ( .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hewinson, Jenny. 2015. Psychological Aspects of Individualized Choice and Reproductive Autonomy in Prenatal Screening. Memoir - American Association Of Petroleum Geologists 29 (1): 9–18. “.” ( .

    Google Scholar 

  • Hewson, Barbara. “Reproductive autonomy and the ethics of abortion.” Journal of Medical Ethics 27. 2001. suppl II:ii10–ii14.

  • Harris, John. 2005. Reproductive liberty, disease and disability. Ethics Law and Moral Philosophy of Reproductive Biomedicine 1 (1): 13–16. “.” ( .

    Google Scholar 

  • Harwood, Karey. 2009. Egg freezing: A breakthrough for reproductive autonomy? Memoir - American Association Of Petroleum Geologists 23 (1): 39–46. “” ( .

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, Emily. 2001. Regulating Reproduction: Law, Technology and Autonomy. Oxford: Hart Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, Josephine, and Rachel L. Zacharias. 2017. “The Future of Reproductive Autonomy,” Just Reproduction: Reimagining Autonomy in Reproductive Medicine, special report. Hastings Center Report 47 (6): S6–S11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaliarnta, S., J. Nihlén-Fahlquist, and S. Roeser. 2011. Emotions and ethical considerations of women undergoing IVF-treatments. HEC forum: an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals’ ethical and legal issues 23 (4): 281–293. “.” ( .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kisu, I., Y. Kato, H. Obara, K. Matsubara, Y. Matoba, K. Banno, and D. Aokia. 2018. Emerging problems in uterus transplantation. Memoir - American Association Of Petroleum Geologists 125 (11): 1352–1356. “.” ( .

    Google Scholar 

  • Knight, Amber, and Joshua Miller. 2021. Prenatal Genetic Screening, Epistemic Justice, and Reproductive Autonomy. Hypatia 36 (1): 1–21. “.” ( .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laufer-Ukeles, Pamela. 2011. Reproductive Choices and Informed Consent: Fetal Interests, Women’s Identity, and Relational Autonomy. American Journal of Law & Medicine 37 (4): 567–623. “.” ( .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lucke, Jayne C. 2012. Reproductive Autonomy Is an Illusion. The American Journal of Bioethics 12 (6): 44–45. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2012.671893. “.” ( : .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mackenzie, Catriona. 2013. “The Importance of Relational Autonomy and Capabilities for an Ethics of Vulnerability.”. In Vulnerability: New Essays in Ethics and Feminist Philosophy, eds. By Catriona Mackenzie, Wendy Rogers, and Susan Dodds, 33–59. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Mcleod, Carolyn. 2009. Rich discussion about reproductive autonomy. Memoir - American Association Of Petroleum Geologists 23: no. 1. “.” .

    Google Scholar 

  • Mertes, H. 2015. Does company-sponsored egg freezing promote or confine women’s reproductive autonomy?”. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 32: 1205–1209. </bvertical-align:super;&gt ( .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mills, Susan. 2003. Exploring the boundaries of reproductive autonomy. Memoir - American Association Of Petroleum Geologists 9: 87–93. “.” ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mills, Catherine. 2011. Futures of Reproduction: Bioethics and Biopolitics. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • O’Donovan, L. 2018. Pushing the boundaries: Uterine transplantation and the limits of reproductive autonomy. Memoir - American Association Of Petroleum Geologists 32: 489–498. “.” ).

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Donovan, L., N. J. Williams, and S. Wilkinson. 2019. Ethical and policy issues raised by uterus transplants. British Medical Bulletin 131 (1): 19–28. “.” ( .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, M. M. 2005. Assisted reproductive technologies and equity of access issues. Journal of Medical Ethics 31 (5): 280–285. “.” ( .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Purdy, L. 2006. Women’s reproductive autonomy: medicalisation and beyond. Journal of Medical Ethics 32 (5): 287–291. “.” ( .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richards, Martin. 2009. “Which Children can we Choose? Boundaries of Reproductive Autonomy.”. In Regulating Autonomy: Sex, Reproduction and Family. Ed by. Shelley Day Sclater, Fatemeh Ebtehaj, Emily Jackson, and Martin Richards, 197–222. Portland: Hart Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robertson, J. A. 1982. The right to procreate and in utero fetal therapy. The Journal of Legal Medicine 3 (3): 333–366. “.” ( .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rozée, V., S. Unisa, and E. de La Rochebrochard. 2020. The social paradoxes of commercial surrogacy in developing countries: India before the new law of 2018. BMC Women’s Health 20: 234. “.” ( : 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rueda, John. “From Self-Determination to Offspring-Determination? Reproductive Autonomy, Procrustean Parenting, and Genetic Enhancement.” Theoria, Early View. 2022.

  • Ruhl, P., and Lealle. 2002. Disarticulating Liberal Subjectivities: Abortion and Fetal Protection. Feminist Studies 28 (1): 37–60. “.” ( .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Søbirk Petersen, T. A. 2004. Woman’s Choice? — On Women, Assisted Reproduction and Social Coercion. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 7: 81–90. “.” ).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steinfeld, Rebecca. “Surrogacy – wish fulfilment or exploitation?” Maternity Action, February 2020. https://maternityaction.org.uk/2020/02/surrogacy-wish-fulfilment-or-exploitation/.

  • Thachuk, Angela. 2007. Midwifery, Informed Choice, and Reproductive Autonomy: A Relational Approach. Feminism & Psychology 17 (1): 39–56. “.” ( .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsu, Peter. 2012. Shiu-Hwa. “Reproductive Autonomy and Normalization of Cesarean Section. American Journal of Bioethics 12, no (7): 61–62. ” ).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Zyl, L. 2002. Intentional Parenthood and the Nuclear Family. Journal of Medical Humanities 23: 107–118. “.” ).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Zyl, Liezl, and Anton Van Niekerk. 2000. Interpretations, perspectives and intentions in surrogate motherhood. Journal of Medical Ethics 26: 404–409. “.” ).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weller, Chris. “What you need to know about egg-freezing, the hot new perk at Google, Apple, and Facebook.” Business Insider, 17 September 2017. https://www.businessinsider.com/egg-freezing-at-facebook-apple-google-hot-new-perk- 2017-9?r = US&IR = T.

  • Wilkinson, Stephen. May 2016. Exploitation in International Paid Surrogacy Arrangements. Journal of Applied Philosophy 33 (2): 125–145. “.” ( .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson, Stephen, and Nicola James Williams. 2016. Should uterus transplants be publicly funded? Journal of Medical Ethics 42: 559–565. “” ).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeiler, K. 2004. Reproductive autonomous choice — A cherished illusion? Reproductive autonomy examined in the context of preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Medicine Health Care and Philosophy 7 : <bvertical-align:super;> </bvertical-align:super;>175–183. “.&#8221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by a VELUX-funded grant, “The Future of Family Relationships” [Project number: 00026589]

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J.Y. Lee.

Ethics declarations

Competing Interests

The author has no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lee, J. The limitations of liberal reproductive autonomy. Med Health Care and Philos 25, 523–529 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-022-10097-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-022-10097-w

Keywords

  • Assisted reproduction
  • ART
  • Reproduction
  • Autonomy
  • Relational autonomy