Abstract
After introducing the concept of ectogenesis (artificial wombs), Kendal explores various arguments in favour of developing this technology from a liberal feminist perspective. The injustice of the unequal distribution of the physical, social and financial risks and burdens of human procreation is considered in the light of pronatalist dogma, which aims to encourage all women to become mothers, despite the numerous disadvantages associated with this choice. It is concluded that the option of ectogenesis is a necessary requirement for sexual equality in reproductive endeavours.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Mary Anne Warren, ‘Making Babies: The New Science and Ethics of Conception by Peter Singer; Deane Wells,’ Ethics 97, no. 1 (1986): 288.
Leslie Cannold, ‘Women, Ectogenesis and Ethical Theory,’ Journal ofApplied Philosophy 12, no. 1 (1995): 56.
Julien S. Murphy, ‘Is Pregnancy Necessary? Feminist Concerns about Ectogenesis,’ Hypatia 4, no. 3 (1989): 66.
Kimberley F. Curtis, ‘Hannah Arendt, Feminist Theorizing, and the Debate over New Reproductive Technologies,’ Polity 28, no. 2 (1995): 162.
Anna Smajdor, ‘The Moral Imperative for Ectogenesis,’ Cambridge Quarterly Healthcare Ethics 16, no. 3 (2007): 340.
Peter Singer and Deane Wells, Making Babies: The New Science and Ethics of Conception ( New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1985 ), 98
Gillian Lockwood, ‘Pregnancy, Autonomy and Paternalism,’ Journal of Medical Ethics 25, no. 6 (1999): 538.
Maureen Sander-Staudt, ‘Of Machine Born? A Feminist Assessment of Ectogenesis and Artificial Wombs,’ in Ectogenesis: Artificial Womb Technology and the Future of Human Reproduction, eds Scott Gelfand and John R. Shook ( New York: Rodopi, 2006 ), 112.
Eran R. Horowitz, et al., ‘Women’s Attitudes toward Analgesia during Labor–A Comparison between 1995 and 2001,’ European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology 117, no. 1 (2004): 31.
J. Hermanides, et al., ‘Failed Epidural: Causes and Management,’ British Journal of Anaesthesia 109, no. 2 (2012): 144. The authors note that incorrect catheter placement was responsible for half of these cases.
Amy L. O’Boyle, et al., ‘Informed Consent and Birth: Protecting the Pelvic Floor and Ourselves,’ American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 187, no. 4 (2002): 981.
Patricia Kendall, et al., ‘Food Handling Behaviors of Special Importance for Pregnant Women, Infants and Young Children, the Elderly, and Immune-Compromised People,’ Journal of the American Dietetic Association 103, no. 12 (2003): 1648.
Tim Bayne and Avery Kolers, ‘Toward a Pluralist Account of Parenthood,’ Bioethics 17, no. 3 (2003): 238.
Jonathan Cohen, ‘The Pregnant Traveller,’ Medicine Today 9, no. 5 (2008): 65.
Marleen M.H.J. van Gelder, et al., ‘Teratogenic Mechanisms of Medical Drugs,’ Human Reproduction Update 16, no. 4 (2010): 379.
Leslie Sutton, ‘Fetal Surgery for Neural Tube Defects,’ Best Practice and Research Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology 22, no. 1 (2008): 175.
Gavin Dawe, et al., ‘Cell Migration from Baby to Mother,’ Cell Adhesion and Migration 1, no. 1 (2007): 19.
Shulamith Firestone, The Dialectic of Sex: The Case for Feminist Revolution ( New York: William Morrow and Company, 1970 ), 198.
Diana Meyers, ‘The Rush to Motherhood: Pronatalist Discourse and Women’s Autonomy,’ Signs 26, no. 3 (2001): 747.
Dorothy E. Roberts, ‘The Genetic Tie,’ The University of Chicago Law Review 62, no. 1 (1995): 240.
Eileen Fischer, et al., ‘Pursuing Parenthood: Integrating Cultural and Cognitive Perspectives on Persistent Goal Striving,’ Journal of Consumer Research 34, no. 4 (2007): 428.
Alena Heitlinger, ‘Pronatalism and Women’s Equality Policies,’ European Journal of Population 7, no. 4 (1991): 344.
Ann Oakley, ‘Gender and Generation: The Life and Times of Adam and Eve,’ in Women and the Life Cycle: Transitions and Turning-Points, eds Patricia Allatt, Teresa Keil, Alan Bryman and Bill Bytheway ( Essex: Macmillan Press, 1987 ), 27.
Satoshi Kanazawa, ‘Intelligence and Childlessness,’ Social Science Research 48 (2014): 157
Harold Feldman, ‘A Comparison of Intentional Parents and Intentionally Childless Couples,’ Journal of Marriage and Family 43, no. 3 (1982): 598.
Lou Ann Patterson and John Defrain, ‘Pronatalism in High School Family Studies Texts,’ Family Relations 30, no. 2 (1981): 211.
Madison Powers, ‘Privacy and Genetics,’ in A Companion to Genethics, eds Justine Burley and John Harris (Oxford: Blackwell, 2002 ), 368.
R.K. Sharma, et al., ‘Sperm DNA Damage and Its Clinical Relevance in Assessing Reproductive Outcome,’ Asian Journal of Andrology 6, no. 2 (2004): 140.
Debarun Majumdar, ‘Choosing Childlessness: Intentions of Voluntary Childlessness in the United States,’ Michigan Sociological Review 18 (2004): 111.
Linda R. Hirshman, Get to Work: A Manifesto for Women of the World ( New York: Viking, 2006 ), 54.
Nancy Folbre, Who Pays for the Kids? Gender and the Structures of Constraint ( London: Routledge, 1994 ), 104.
Ruth Colker, Pregnant Men: Practice, Theory, and the Law ( Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1994 ), 159.
Robyn Rowland, ‘Technology and Motherhood: Reproductive Choice Reconsidered,’ Signs 12, no. 3 (1987): 524.
Carlo Bulletti, et al., ‘The Artificial Womb,’ Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1221 (2011): 127.
M. Jean Heriot, ‘Fetal Rights versus the Female Body: Contested Domains,’ Medical Anthropology Quarterly 10, no. 2 (1996): 179.
Gregory Pence, ‘What’s So Good about Natural Motherhood? (In Praise of Unnatural Gestation),’ in Ectogenesis: Artificial Womb Technology and the Future of Human Reproduction, eds Scott Gelfand and John R. Shook ( New York: Rodopi, 2006 ), 85.
Gabor T. Kovacs, et al., ‘Embryo Donation at an Australian University In-Vitro Fertilisation Clinic: Issues and Outcomes,’ Medical Journal of Australia 178, no. 3 (2003): 127.
Amel Alghrani and Margaret Brazier, ‘What Is It? Whose It? Re-Positioning the Fetus in the Context of Research?’ Cambridge Law Journal 70, no. 1 (2011): 72.
C.M. Farquhar, et al., ‘A Comparative Analysis of Assisted Reproductive Technology Cycles in Australia and New Zealand 2004–2007,’ Human Reproduction 25, no. 9 (2010): 2281.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2015 Evie Kendal
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kendal, E. (2015). Introduction: The Need for Ectogenesis. In: Equal Opportunity and the Case for State Sponsored Ectogenesis. Palgrave Pivot, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137549877_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137549877_1
Publisher Name: Palgrave Pivot, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-55985-5
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-54987-7
eBook Packages: Palgrave Religion & Philosophy CollectionPhilosophy and Religion (R0)