How to Ethically Analyze Reproductive Technologies | Glenn Cohen

31 Comments

  1. Felicity Ray Self said:

    A woman in Ohio was accidentally implanted with the embryo of another couple. (The wrong people's embryos were used). This recently happened. The couple decided to carry the baby and allow it to live and be born, whereby they then are giving it over to the correct parents. The parents ( biological) are delighted and grateful for the couple's willingness to help with the mistakes of the clinic.

    Often times extra Embryos are destroyed, sometimes they are used as scientific research, they can be traded, sold, bartered, ..

    It boggles the mind.

    A woman wants to use the sperm of her dead husband.
    One family member of the deceased man is glad she does, another family member thinks she shouldn't. They have no say in the matter.

    A 70 year old women is impregnated with a random strangers egg in India and carries the baby and gives birth to it. This child will never know who it's biological mother is and the woman who is it's "mother" will be 90 when she is 20.

    A woman who's divorced but still wants to use her ex husband's sperm.or embryos created from the time they were together.

    Many coups fight ever sperm, eggs and embryos in divorces.

    A woman tries to sue her dead husband's family for his life insurance that he left to any children they might have. He died before they have children but she's determined to use his sperm to make sure she still gets that life insurance.

    Or the ex spouse destroys embryos against your will after a divorce.

    A husband implants the embroys of his ex wife into his new wife without the ex wife's consent.

    Embroys could be stolen from one clinic and shipped to another.

    Mothers, aunts, daughters, cousins, grandmothers carrying their own childrens or other relatives child. So the child has a grandmother, aunt, cousin who is also their either biological or at least gestational parent.
    Talk about confusion.

    People fighting over eggs, sperm and embryos like property in divorces and or in wills.

    In laws fighting for the embryo of their deceased son or daughter with his or her family after the death of said son or daughter.

    Being implanted with someone else's embryos on accident and then you decide to terminate the pregnancy.. you've just taken that other couples chance to have that child or children.

    Having a particular man being a popular sperm donor in a single geographic area. He could have up to 500 children with different mothers and all his children would be half brothers and sisters. They could easily fall in love with each other and be committing incest without knowing it

    A woman could have up to 35 children from her donated eggs in a single town and those children could grow up and become incestuous without knowing it

    Children with two mothers, two fathers, or even three parents, with the Mitochondrial transfer.. and they never had a chance to say if they wanted to be in such a situation.

    Many people could grow up and feel cheated by never knowing who their biological parents are or be confused by the fact that their grandmother carried them in the womb.

    the possibility of endless convoluted pathways. Confusion and chaos. Not fair to the child.

    Children are treated like a product.. like a commodity.

    A person could be a surrogate to a couple who doesn't want a disabled child. Then the child implanted in the surrogate mother's womb could end up being a person who has Down's Syndrome and the surrogate mother might refuse to terminate the contract.. ( I mean.. just the fact that a person is created with a contract stating exactly what will allow them a chance to live in the first place is turning them into "consumer goods") .This last scenario really happened and the biological parents of the baby born with Down's Syndrome were pissed that the surrogate Mom refused to kill their child while it was in her womb because they paid her to carry a normal kid not a child who had Downs Syndrome. They wanted that child to be dead.

    It wasn't a child to them.. it was merely a "product of conception". Mental gymnastics and semantics.

    This is literally just the tip of the iceberg. When it comes to all the possible scenarios , drama and unforseen problems that can arrise.

    The ethical and social problems that can arrise from things like surrogacy, IVF, egg and sperm donation and all of the other reproductive sciences is just mind boggling.

    You have been warned.

    June 27, 2019
    Reply
  2. somemo4u said:

    Every child has the right to know and be taken care of by their mother and father. Also to not be sold or 'donated' and denied their true identity.

    June 27, 2019
    Reply
  3. Molly Granger said:

    ART helps us who can't have a baby, something that should be a given. I had my baby with an IVF at Ingenes in Mexico, so we are very grateful to all scientists for all that's been done for us.

    June 27, 2019
    Reply
  4. Mohd. islam said:

    https://youtu.be/67-P6aJXd_k
    Real class

    June 27, 2019
    Reply
  5. B said:

    Third party reproduction is unethical because it is a violation of childrens' rights. Children have a natural right to their biological mother and biological father. But what about adoption? Keep in mind that adoption is a last resort, even then the CHILD is the client, the CHILD's best interests are taken into consideration. And also the event that occurred that put the child in the position to need to be adopted in the first place in universally seen a tragedy, and world-over those events are something we are trying to prevent. With adoption, children are place in homes as a means of rescue.

    With third-party reproduction, the ADULTS are the clients, not the children, and the whole point of reproduction is to meet adult desires. It doesn't even recognize that children have a natural right to their biological mother and father. And it doesn't even recognize that separation from a mother and father as a form of tragedy, as adoption does.

    If the intended mother and father wanted a biological connect to their baby so bad that they were willing to find an egg donor or sperm donor, then why wouldn't it occur to them if a biological connection was so important to them that it wouldn't be important to their child? Intension matters to a child. Knowing that you arrived in a home as a means of rescue as opposed to being deliberately separated from your biological parent(s) to meet adult desires, that difference matters to kids.

    Websites like "Anonymous Us" and "Them Before Us" and documentaries like "Anonymous Father's Day" give a voice to children who are the product of third-party reproduction. Until now, no one was asking what they thought about it. Their opinion matters. I've ready enough of their stories and testimonies to be convinced that third-party reproduction is a violation of childrens' rights, and thereby a violation of human rights.

    June 27, 2019
    Reply
  6. iconno11 said:

    I'm not sure if this already exists, but I think surrogate mothers should sign a conditional contract with the donor parents. The two (or more) contracts could be having the right to keep the child the surrogate mother carries until several hours after birth or that they must give the child to the donor parents despite potential feelings that may arise over the gestational period. Although this would present with complications it would allow a predicted amount of uncertainty for the surrogate mother and the donor parents. Thoughts?

    June 27, 2019
    Reply
  7. Gigel Chiazna said:

    a guy with those glasses probably should not be allowed to talk about bioethics

    June 27, 2019
    Reply
  8. Neavris said:

    This guy is really good. I couldn't figure him out for a second. It turns out he has a bac in psychology and a JD from Harvard.

    June 27, 2019
    Reply
  9. Patrick King said:

    I think it's worth focusing not on our intuitions about the morality of these actions and what we think, but on the actual potential for negative consequences for these children and society at large.These are considered of course, but I think they should be the main priority if not the only one.

    June 27, 2019
    Reply
  10. yksnimus said:

    Woah, no emotional bullshit, thats such pleasurable speech..I dont see the problem in enhancing humans (assuming its safe and no negative inpacts(side effects) on the enhanced one). Unfair? Are you kidding me..better ppl will make a better society, everyone wins in the end..bohoo that they will be better than normals…its the same machine taking our jobs again

    June 27, 2019
    Reply
  11. bamischijfje123 said:

    we already fucked up the whole evolution theory for humans, so it's about damn time we start enhancing dna in order to manipulate the evolution theory. I don't see the problem in that

    June 27, 2019
    Reply
  12. Raspysquares said:

    Gay

    June 27, 2019
    Reply
  13. MrBOOMHEADSHOT9000 said:

    unethical, good luck having a souless homunculus wish baby.

    June 27, 2019
    Reply
  14. Henry Coker said:

    can't seem too excited about this science can be pretty amazing but it seems to always wind up crossing boundaries

    June 27, 2019
    Reply
  15. melmelmog said:

    stop with surrogates…we have enough kids in foster homes. adopt.

    June 27, 2019
    Reply
  16. john doe said:

    that guy has a creepy smile

    June 27, 2019
    Reply
  17. Lemonducky said:

    Good ol ethics question being fuzzy and slippery to no end. That's why it's fun to think about I suppose.

    June 27, 2019
    Reply
  18. EvieJay said:

    I think I just realised that morally speaking… I'd be pretty much fine with creating Khan Noonien Singh.
    Not so much because I think Humanity could use some general improvements(although this I think may be true), more that individuals, not society in general, are usually the preferred decider for the fates of their offspring.
    We mostly seem completely fine with parents deciding all kinds of insane shit for their kids – don't really know if intelligence or ability should be the arbitrary line.

    June 27, 2019
    Reply
  19. lnternet RB said:

    This was very good. He probably shouldn't mix conceptuality (the topic of this video, how to reason logically) with a heated subject (the example of this video and title, reproductive tech), as it makes it difficult to argue about one of them in isolation. Better to exemplify the conceptuality on a simpler subject. Or to take the heated subject and only apply the conceptuality.

    June 27, 2019
    Reply
  20. xApemanx said:

    soon, man could live in peace without legal liability to women

    June 27, 2019
    Reply
  21. Jonathan Gibson said:

    This was a really great video. Would up vote more than once if I could!

    June 27, 2019
    Reply
  22. Jenkkimie said:

    And one day, not in our lifetime, people will be grown in tubes as the superior method of creating new persons.

    June 27, 2019
    Reply
  23. Dirty Slav said:

    Solid Dude.

    June 27, 2019
    Reply
  24. Random Rando said:

    It'll be great to see this dude question the ethics of furries genetically modifying themselves for maximum yiffing in the future.

    June 27, 2019
    Reply
  25. CinnamonChimera said:

    Why wasn't the future of artificial wombs and embryo transference discussed? I know it's far off in the future, but certainly they should certainly be given ethical consideration, right?

    June 27, 2019
    Reply
  26. joshua vaipulu said:

    I basically love every video this man speaks in

    June 27, 2019
    Reply
  27. Jonathan Mok said:

    Every time I see an ethics based video from Big Think, I always hope it is done by Glenn Cohen.

    June 27, 2019
    Reply
  28. Howard White said:

    Cosmic, man… That's gonna have to rattle around in my head for a while; come back and watch again.

    June 27, 2019
    Reply
  29. Fwm Fwm Fwm Whoa said:

    lol I haven't watched yet but I know it's gonna be spooky

    June 27, 2019
    Reply
  30. avidreader 231 said:

    i'm so glad to be subscribed to this channel

    June 27, 2019
    Reply
  31. Garudabr said:

    The word ethic and a thumbnail of 2 women with a child? that's probably some sjw bullshit. disliked and unsubed for the 15th time. But don't worry I'm gonna sub again to see the next video and post the same comment over and over again.

    June 27, 2019
    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *