Why Commercial Surrogate Motherhood Unethically Commodifies Women and Children: Reply to McLachlan and Swales
- 618 Downloads
McLachlan and Swales dispute my arguments against commercial surrogatemotherhood. In reply, I argue that commercial surrogate contractsobjectionably commodify children because they regardparental rights over children not as trusts, to be allocated in the bestinterests of the child, but as like property rights, to be allocatedat the will o the parents. They also express disrespect for mothers, bycompromising their inalienable right to act in the best interest of theirchildren, when this interest calls for mothers to assert a custody rightin their children.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Anderson, E. (1993) Value in Ethics and Economics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Kant, I. (1964) Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals (Trans. H.J. Paton). New York: Harper.Google Scholar
- McLachlan, M.V. and Swales, J.K. (2000) Babies, Child Bearers and Commodification. Health Care Analysis (this issue).Google Scholar
- Satz, D. (1992) Markets in Women's Reproductive Labor. Philosophy and Public Affairs 21, 107–131.Google Scholar