Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

How Pragmatic is Bioethics?

The Case of In Vitro Fertilization

  • Chapter
Book cover Pragmatist Ethics for a Technological Culture

Abstract

In his Birth of Bioethics Al Jonsen describes American pragmatism as the source for some of the most distinctive traits of bioethics (Jonsen, 1998). A similar thesis - that much of the bioethical literature has in fact been developed from a pragmatist model - is defended by various authors in Pragmatic Bioethics (McGee, 1999). For example, Jonathan Moreno claims that in the 1950s and 1960s theologians dominated bioethics but that a shift has taken place since the 1970s towards a more pragmatist orientation. According to Susan M. Wolf (1994) this shift has taken place later. She states that bioethics (as well as health law) has always been an applied and practical discipline, but has only recently witnessed the turn to a truly pragmatist paradigm.

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 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
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

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Reference

  • Crowe, C. (1990). “Whose mind over whose matter? Women, in vitro fertilization and the development of scientific knowledge”, in: M. McNeil, I. Varcoe and S. Yearley (eds.). The new reproductive technologies. London: McMillan: p. 27–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daniel W.J. (1982). “Sexual ethics in relation to IVF and ET: the fitting use of human reproductive power”, in: W. Walters and P. Singer (eds.). Test-tube babies, Melbourne: Oxford University Press, p. 71–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis D.S. (2001). Genetic dilemmas. Reproductive technology, parental choices and children’s futures. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dixon, B. (1984), “Engineering chimeras for Noah’s ark”, in: Hastings Center Report 14(2): 10–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donchin, A. (1996). “Feminist critiques of new fertility technologies: implications for social policy”, in: Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 21(5): 475–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Draper, H. and R. Chadwick (1999). “Beware! Preimplantation genetic diagnosis may solve some old problems but it also raises new ones”, in: Journal of Medical Ethics 25(2): 114–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ducharme, H.M. (1991). “The Vatican’s dilemma: on the morality of IVF and the Incarnation”, in: Bioethics 5(1): 57–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunstan G.R. (1984). “The moral status of the human embryo: a tradition recalled”, in: Journal of Medical Ethics 10:38–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunstan G.R. (1986). “In vitro fertilization: the ethics”, in: Human Reproduction 1(1):41–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards R.G. (1974). “Fertilization of human eggs in vitro: morals, ethics and the law”, in: The Quarterly Review of Biology 49 (1): 3–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elfstrom, G. and P. Ramsey (1979). “Risk taking and artificial conception”, in: Hastings Center Report 9(2): 4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emanuel, E.J. and K. Powderly (1994). “Cancer and maybe a baby?”, in: Hastings Center Report 24(6): 24–25. (Case study and commentaries)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fagot-Largeault, A. (1987). “Reproductive technology: in France, debate and indecision”, in: Hastings Center Report 17(3): S10–S12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fassler, D., L.B. Andrews and H.O. Tiefel (1985). “When baby’s mother is also grandma--and sister”, in: Hastings Center Report 15(5): 29–31. (Case study and commentaries)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fins, J.J., M.D. Bachetta and F.G. Miller (1999). “Clinical pragmatism: a method of moral problem

    Google Scholar 

  • solving“, in: G. McGee (ed.), Pragmatic Bioethics, Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press, p. 30–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher, J. (1974). The ethics of genetic control: ending reproductive roulette. Garden City New York: Anchor Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher, J.C. and J.D. Schulman (1985). “Fetal research: the state of the question”, in: Hastings Center Report 15(2): 6–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaze, B. and K. Dawson (1989).“Distinguishing medical practice and research: the special case of IVF”in: Bioethics 3(4): 301–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gezondheidsraad (1986). Advies inzake kunstmatige voortplanting. (Dutch Health Council, Report on artificial reproduction) Den Haag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillon, R. (1987). “Reproductive technology in Britain: the debate after the Warnock Report”, in: Hastings Center Report 17(3): S16–S18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Golombok, S. and J. Rust (1986). “The Warnock Report and single women: what about the children?”, in: Journal of Medical Ethics 12(4): 182–186.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gorovitz, S. (1985). “Engineering human reproduction: a challenge to public policy”, in: Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 10(3): 267–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grobstein, C. (1982). “The moral uses of ‘spare’ embryos”, in: Hastings Center Report 12(3): 5–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haimes, E. (1992). “Gamete donation and the social management of genetic origins”, in: M. Stacey (ed.), Changing human reproduction - social science perspectives. London: Sage Publications, p. 119–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Handwerker, L. (1995). “Social and ethical implications of ‘in vitro’ fertilization in contemporary China”, in: Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 4(3): 355–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, J. (1983). “In vitro fertilization: the ethical issues”, in: The Philosophical Quarterly 33(132): 217-­237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, J. (1999). “Doctors’ orders, rationality and the good life: commentary on Savulescu”, in: Journal of Medical Ethics 25(2): 127–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, J. and S. Holm (eds.) (1998). The future of human reproduction. Ethics, choice and regulation. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, J.C. (1989). “Speculations regarding the history of Donum Vitae”, in: Journal of medicine and Philosophy 14(5): 481–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heitman, E. (1999). “Social and ethical aspects of in vitro fertilization”, in: International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 15(1): 22–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hellegers, A.E. and R.A. McCormick (1978). “Unanswered questions on test tube life”, in: America, August: 74–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heyd, D. (1993). “Artificial reproductive technologies: the Israeli scene”, in: Bioethics 7(2/3): 263–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heyd, D. (1996). “Experimenting with embryos: can philosophy help?”, in: Bioethics 10(4): 292–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hickman, L.A. (1992). John Dewey’s pragmatic technology, Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hickman, L.A. (1999). “Making the family functional: the case for legalized same-sex domestic partnerships”, in: Philosophy of the Social Sciences 29(2): 231–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hickman, L.A. (2001). Philosophical tools for technological culture. Putting pragmatism to work, Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holm, S. (1988). “New Danish law: human life begins at conception”, in: Journal of Medical Ethics 14(2): 77–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iglesias, T. (1984). “‘In vitro’ fertilisation: the major issues”, in: Journal of Medical Ethics 10(1): 32–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jabbari, D. (1990). “The role of law in reproductive medicine: a new approach”, in: Journal of Medical Ethics 16(1): 35–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jansen, R.P.S. (1985). “Sperm and ova as property”, in: Journal of Medical Ethics 11(3): 123–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenks, P.C. and R. Macklin (1992). “Sequencing the cycle”, in: Hastings Center Report 22(2): 61 (Letter and response)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonsen, A.R. (1998). The birth of bioethics. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kasimba, P. and P. Singer (1989). “Australian commissions and committees on issues in bioethics”, in: Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 14(4): 403–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kass, L.R. (1971). “Babies by means of in vitro fertilization: unethical experiments on the unborn?”, in: New England Journal of Medicine 285 (21): 1174–1179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kass, L.R. (1972). “Making babies - the new biology and the ‘old’ morality”, in: Public Interest (26): 18-­56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kass, L.R. (1979). “‘Making babies’ revisited”, in: Public Interest (33): 32–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keulartz, J., M. Korthals, M. Schermer and T. Swierstra (2002), “Ethics in a Technological Culture”. (this volume)

    Google Scholar 

  • King, D.S. (1999). “Preimplantation genetic diagnosis and the ‘new’ eugenics”, in: Journal of Medical Ethics 25(2): 176–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirby, M.D. (1984). “Bioethics of IVF - the state of the debate”, in: Journal of Medical Ethics 10(1): 45-­48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirejczyk, M.S.M. (1996). Met technologie gezegend? Utrecht: Jan van Arkel. (Blessed with technology?)

    Google Scholar 

  • Klotzko, A.J. (1998). “Medical miracle or medical mischief? The saga of the McCaughey septulets”, in: Hastings Center Report 28(3): 5–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kondratowicz, D.M. (1997). “Approaches responsive to reproductive technologies: a need for critical assessment and directions for further study”, in: Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 6(2): 148–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krimmel, H.T. (1983). “The case against surrogate parenting”, in: Hastings Center Report 13(5): 35–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhse, H. (1988). “A report from Australia: when a human life has not yet begun - according to the law”, in: Bioethics 2(4): 334–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhse, H. and P. Singer (1993). “From the editors”, in: Bioethics 7(1): iii-v. (new reproductive technologies in Italy)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhse, H. and P. Singer (1994). “From the editors”, Bioethics 8(2): iii-iv. (post-menopausal mothers)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kymlicka, W. (1993). “Moral philosophy and public policy: the case of NRTs”, in: Bioethics 7(1): 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lappé, M. (1978). “Ethics at the center of life: protecting vulnerable subjects”, in: Hastings Center Report 8(5): 11–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lau, S. (1995). “Report from Hong Kong”, in: Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 4(3): 364–366. (reproductive technologies).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lauritzen, P. (1990). “What price parenthood?”, in: Hastings Center Report 20(2): 38–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lebech, A.M.M. (1997). “Anonymity and informed consent in artificial procreation: a report from Denmark”, in: Bioethics 11(3–4): 336–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leeton J.F, A.O. Trounson and C. Wood (1982). “IVF and ET: what it is and how it works”, in: W. Walters and P. Singer (eds.), Test-tube babies. Melbourne: Oxford University Press, p. 2–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • LeMoncheck, L. (1996). “Philosophy, gender politics, and in vitro fertilization: a feminist ethics of reproductive healthcare”, in: Journal of Clinical Ethics 7(2): 160–176.

    Google Scholar 

  • Light A. and E. Katz (eds.) (1996). Environmental pragmatism. London/New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lockwood, G.M. (1999). “Pregnancy, autonomy and paternalism”, in: Journal of Medical Ethics 25(6): 537–540.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowy, F.H., M.A. Paterson et al. (1995). “Immortality through the fertility clinic”, in: Cambridge Quarterly of Heafthcare Ethics 4(3): 375–386. (Case study and commentaries)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macklin, R. (1991). “Artificial means of reproduction and our understanding of the family”, in: Hastings Center Report 21(1): 5–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macklin, R. (1995). “Reproductive technologies in developing countries”, in: Bioethics 9(3/4): 276–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahowald, M.B. and C. Cohen (1997). “On the welfare of possible persons”, in: Hastings Center Report 27(1): 2. (Letter and response)

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, F.H. and D.J. Self (1980). “In vitro fertilization: moving from theory to therapy”, in: Hastings Center Report 10(3): 5–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, N. (1996). “Introduction” (to four articles on reproductive technologies by A. Donchin, L.M.Purdy, S. Squier and MA.), in: Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 21(5): 471–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCormick, R.A. (1999). “The ethical and religious challenges of reproductive technology”, in:

    Google Scholar 

  • Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 8(4): 547–556.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCormick, R.A and M.O. Steinfels (1979). “The EAB and in vitro fertilization”, in: Hastings Center Report 9(6): 4–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGee, G. (ed.) (1999). Pragmatic Bioethics. Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGee, G. (1997). “Parenting in an era of genetics”, in: Hastings Center Report 27(2): 16–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michael, M. and S. Buckle (1990). “Screening for genetic disorders: therapeutic abortion and IVF”, in: Journal of Medical Ethics 16(1): 43–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, G.D. and P. Singer (1983). “In vitro’ fertilisation: the major issues - a comment”, in: Journal of Medical Ethics 9(4): 196–199. (Article and response)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moreno, J.D. (1999). “Bioethics is a naturalism”, in: G. McGee (ed.), Pragmatic Bioethics. Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press, p. 5–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mori, M. (1998). “On the concept of pre-embryo: the basis for a new ‘Copernican revolution’ in the current view about human reproduction”, in: J. Harris and S. Holm (eds.), The future of human reproduction. Ethics, choice and regulation. Oxford: Clarendon Press, p. 38–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, T.F. (1990). “Reproductive controls and sexual destiny”, in: Bioethics 4(2): 121–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, T.F. (1995). “Sperm harvesting and post-mortem fatherhood”, in: Bioethics 9(5): 380–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicholas, B. (1996). “Community and justice: the challenges of bicultural partnership to policy on assisted reproductive technology”, in: Bioethics 10(3): 212–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ozar, D.T. (1985). “The case against thawing unused frozen embryos”, in: Hastings Center Report 15(4): 7–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Page, E. (1985). “Donation, surrogacy and adoption”, in: Journal of Applied Philosophy 2(2): 161–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Page, E. (1990). “Taking surrogacy seriously”, in: D.R. Bromham, M.E. Dalton and J.C. Jackson (eds.), Philosophical ethics in reproductive medicine. Manchester: Manchester University Press, p. 51–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker, M. (2000). “Public deliberation and private choice in genetics and reproduction”, in: Journal of Medical Ethics 26(3): 160–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petchesky, R. (1987). “Foetal images: the power of visual culture in the politics of reproduction”, in: M. Stanworth (ed.), Reproductive technologies - Gender,motherhood and medicine. Cambridge: Polity Press, p. 57–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plasterk, R. (2001). “Recht op een handicap?”, in: De Volkskrant 11 mei.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poplawski, N. and G. Gillett (1991). “Ethics and embryos”, in: Journal of Medical Ethics 17(2): 62–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pouncy, C.L. and R.V. Haning (1986). “The status of the ethics of in vitro fertilization in 1985”, in: Forensic Science International 30: 127–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Purdy, L.M. (1996). “What can progress in reproductive technology mean for women?”, in: Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 21(5): 499–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramsey, P. (1972a). “Shall we ‘reproduce? I. The medical ethics of in vitro fertilization”, in: JAMA 220(10): 1346–1350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramsey, P. (1972b). “Shall we reproduce? II. Rejoinders and future forecast”, in: JAMA 220(11): 1480-­1485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramsey, P. (1978). “Manufacturing our offspring: weighing the risks”, in: Hastings Center Report 8(5): 7–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rassaby, A.A. (1982). “Surrogate motherhood: the position and problems of substitutes”, in: W. Walters and P. Singer (eds.), Test-tube babies. Melbourne: Oxford University Press, p. 97–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raymond, J.G. (1990). “Reproductive gifts and gift giving: the altruistic woman”, in: Hastings CenterReport 20(6): 7–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robertson, J.A. (1989). “Resolving disputes over frozen embryos”, in: Hastings Center Report 19(6): 7­-12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robertson, J.A. (1991). “What we may do with preembryos: a response to Richard A. McCormick, in: Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 1(4): 293–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robertson, J.A. (1995). “The case of the switched embryos”, in: Hastings Center Report 25(6): 13–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robertson, J.A. (1978). “In vitro conception and harm to the unborn”, in: Hastings Center Report 8(5): 13–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robertson, J.A. (1983). “Surrogate mothers: not so novel after all”, in: Hastings Center Report 13(5): 28-­34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robertson, J.A. (1998). “Meaning what you sign”, in: Hastings Center Report 28(4): 22–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robertson, J., M.B. Mahowald and M. Ryan (1991). “Life, liberty and the pursuit of offspring”, in: Hastings Center Report 21(4): 38–40. (Letters and response)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, B.E.S. (1997). “Birds do it. Bees do it. So why not single women and lesbians?”, in: Bioethics 11(3–4): 217–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothman, B.K. (1987). The tentative pregnancy: prenatal diagnosis and the future of motherhood. New York: Peguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothman, B.K. (1992). “Not all that glitters is gold”, in: Hastings Center Report 22(4): S11–S15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothman, B.K. and M. Stacey (1985). “The products of conception: the social context of reproductive choices”, in: Journal of Medical Ethics 11(4): 188–195. (Article and commentary)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowland, R. (1987). “Making women visible in the embryo experimentation debate”, in: Bioethics 1(2): 179–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, M.A. (1990). “The argument for unlimited procreative liberty: a feminist critique”, in: Hastings Center Report 20(4): 6–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, M.A. (1995). ‘The new reproductive technologies: defying God’s dominion?“, in: Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 20(4): 419–438.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sass, H.-M. (1989). “Medical ethics in socialist countries: introduction”, in: Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 14(3): 233–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Savulescu, J. (1999). “Should doctors intentionally do less than the best?”, in: Journal of Medical Ethics 25(2): 121–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scarlett, B.F., P. Singer and H. Kuhse (1984a). “The moral status of embryos”, in: Journal of Medkal Ethics 10(2): 79–81. (Article and response)

    Google Scholar 

  • Scarlett, B.F., P. Singer and H. Kuhse (19846). “Singer and Kuhse on the potential of embryos; [and] Response to Scarlett”, in: Journal of Medical Ethics 10(4): 217–218. (Letter and response)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seller, M.J. (1993). “The human embryo: a scientist’s point of view”, in: Bioethics 7(2/3): 135–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Serour, G.I. (1993). ‘Bioethics in artificial reproduction in the Muslim world“, in: Bioethics 7(2/3): 207–217.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapira, A. (1987). “Reproductive technology in Israel: law, religious orthodoxy, and reproductive technologies”, in: Hastings Center Report 17(3): S12–S14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, M.W. (1980). “In vitro fertilization• for infertile married couples only?”, in: Hastings Center Report 10(5): 4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shea, M.C. (1987). “Ensoulment and IVF embryos”, in: Journal of Medical Ethics 13(2): 95–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singer P. and D. Wells (1983). “‘In vitro’ fertilisation: the major issues”, in: Journal of Medical Ethics 9(4): 192–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singer, P. (1985). “Making laws on making babies”, in: Hastings Center Report 15(4): 5–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spicker, S.F. (1989a). “Introduction (to an issue on reproductive technologies)”, in: Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 14(5): 473–476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spicker, S.F. (1989b). “Overview of the reports of the Ethics Committee of the American Fertility Society”, in: Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 14(5): 477–480.

    Google Scholar 

  • Squier, S. (1996). “Fetal subjects and maternal objects: reproductive technology and the new fetal/maternal relation”, in: Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 21(5): 515–535.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stanworth, M. (1987). “The deconstruction of motherhood”, in: M. Stanworth (ed.), Reproductive technologies- Gender, motherhood and medicine. Cambridge: Polity Press, p. 10–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinbock, B. (1994). “The moral status of extracorporeal embryos. Pre-born children, property or something else”, in: A. Dyson and J. Harris (eds.), Ethics and biotechnology. New York: Routledge, p. 79–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinfels, M.O. (1979). “In vitro fertilization: ‘ethically acceptable’ research”, in: Hastings Center Report 9(3): 5–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tannsjo, T. (1992). “Who are the beneficiaries?”, in: Bioethics 6(4): 288–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tauer, C.A. (1997). “Embryo research and public policy: a philosopher’s appraisal”, in: Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 22(5): 423–439.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thornton, J.G., H.M. McNamara and I.A. Montague (1995). “Would you rather be a ‘birth’ or a ‘genetic’ mother? If so, how much?”, In: Journal of Medical Ethics 21(6): 345–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toulmin, S. (1978). “In Vitro Fertilization: Answering the ethical objections”, in: Hastings Center Report 8(5): 9–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Towers, B. (1982). “Medical involvement in procreation: how far?”, in: Journal of Medical Ethics 8(2): 100–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tranoy, K.E. (1988). ‘Biomedical value conflict“, in: Hastings Center Report 18(4): S8–S10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uniacke, S. (1987). “In vitro fertilization and the right to reproduce”, in: Bioethics 1(3): 241–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vacek, E.C. (1992). “Catholic ‘natural law’ and reproductive ethics”, in: Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 17(3): 329–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Wilt, G.J. (1994). “Health care and the principle of fair equality of opportunity: a report from The Netherlands”, in: Bioethics 8(4): 329–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wachter, M.A.M. and G.M.W.R. De Wert (1987). “Reproductive technology in the Netherlands: tolerance and debate”, in: Hastings Center Report 17(3): S15–S16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Dyck, J. (1995). Manufacturing babies and public consent. Debating the new reproductive technologies. London: Macmillan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waller, L. (1987). “Reproductive technology in Australia: the debate moves to embryo experimentation”, in: Hastings Center Report 17(3): S21–S22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walters, L. (1979). “Human in vitro fertilization: a review of the ethical literature”, in: Hastings Center Report 9(4): 23–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walters, L. (1985). “Editor’s introduction [to an issue on genetic and reproductive technologies]”, in: Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 10(3): 209–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walters, L. (1987). “Ethics and new reproductive technologies: an international review of committee statements”, in: Hastings Center Report 17(3): S3–S9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walters, L. (1996). “Current and future issues in assisted reproduction”, in: Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 6(4): 383–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walters, W. and P. Singer (eds.) (1982). Test-tube babies. Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warnock, M. (1983). “In vitro fertilization. The ethical issues II”, in: The Philosophical Quarterly 33(132): 238–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warnock, M. (1987). “The good of the child”, in: Bioethics 1(2): 141–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warren, M.A. (1988). “IVF and women’s interests: an analysis of feminist concerns”, in: Bioethics 2(1): 37–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wells, D. (1987). “Ectogenesis, justice and utility: a reply to James”, in: Bioethics 1(4): 372–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, B.C. (1989). “Overview of the OTA report ‘Infertility: Medical and Social Choices’”, in: Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 14(5): 493–496.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, G.B. (1989). “Ethical analyses in the development of Congressional public policy”, in: Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 14(5): 575–585.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiesing, U. (1993). “In vitro fertilization: regulations in Germany”, in: Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 2(3): 321–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolf, S. M. (1994). “Shifting paradigms in bioethics and health law: the rise of a new pragmatism”, in: American Journal of Law and Medicine 20(4): 395–415.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Maartje Schermer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jozef Keulartz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands

    Jozef Keulartz  & Michiel Korthals  & 

  2. University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Maartje Schermer

  3. Twente University, Enschede, The Netherlands

    Tsjalling Swierstra

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2002 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Schermer, M., Keulartz, J. (2002). How Pragmatic is Bioethics?. In: Keulartz, J., Korthals, M., Schermer, M., Swierstra, T. (eds) Pragmatist Ethics for a Technological Culture. The International Library of Environmental, Agricultural and Food Ethics, vol 3. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0301-8_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0301-8_4

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-1115-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-010-0301-8

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation