Video Files Formats Essay Research Paper Invitro

Video Files Formats Essay, Research Paper

Invitro is defined as, .In glass, as in a test tube. (Taber.s cyclopedic

dictionary,1993), hence with reference to invitro fertilization, the term

.Test tube baby.. The first .test tube baby. was Louise Brown of England

(Jonsen, A. R., 1996). Dr. Patrick Steptoe and Professor Robert Edwards combined

an ovum from Mrs. Brown, and sperm from Mr. Brown cultured it in a petri dish,

and reimplanted the now embryo into Mrs. Brown.s uterus (Jonsen, A. R.,1996).

The result was the same as a child born in the usual way, only the means to the

end was different. The media had a field day with this, and since then,

reproduction as we know it has changed. We now use the term .assisted

reproduction. to describe a host of methods used to assist infertile couples

to have children. A menagerie of large terms, abbreviations, and acronyms are

used under the umbrella of this term, such as GIFT, IVF, FSH, AID, etc. The

bottom line is that technology has allowed man to take yet another matter into

his own hands, that may be considered .playing God.. As with any new

procedure or product, there are always .bugs to work out.. Sometimes we can

anticipate what these will be, but many times we .cross that bridge when we

come to it.. Such seems to be the case with assisted reproduction. Considering

the complicated custody battles already occurring with regard to our

.naturally made children., we have seen, and can anticipate more tangled

legal webs ahead. Not much has been done to anticipate the complexities involved

with assisted reproduction. In 1975, a federal law was enacted that created an

Ethics Advisory Board (EAB)(Caplan, A. L., 1990). In 1979, this organization

issued a report merely stating that invitro fertilization was worthy of monetary

funds (Caplan, A. L., 1990). The EAB disbanded in 1979 (Caplan, A. L., 1990). In

1994, The American Society for Reproductive Medicine designed a set of ethical

considerations, but compliance is voluntary (Klotzko, A. J., 1998). Since no

real regulatory agency exists, IVF is done as providers see fit. The formation

of The American Society for Reproductive medicine reflects the fact that there

are clearly many ethical issues with regard to IVF. Three issues are the

following: 1. Previously, an embryo has been a part of a woman.s body. Roe vs.

Wade based it.s decision on abortion being part of a woman.s privacy. With

regard to frozen embryos which are not a part of the women.s body, does she

have the right to choose their fate, and does the father have equal say. 2. Do

the potential parents of these embryos have the right to change their minds

about becoming parents once the embryos have been frozen. 3. In complicated

matters with multiple parents, does multiple parental roles with visitation

rights adversely affect a child.s social development. When one is discussing

abortion, the argument heard most often by the advocates of pro-choice is that

this is a matter of a woman controlling what goes on with her body. Furthermore,

advocates claim, that as such, the elimination of the fetus falls under this

right of privacy. Pro-life advocates feel that these embryos are individual

human beings entitled to the right to be born. Embryos are considered life in

the earliest of stages. However, what we have here are frozen embryos, suspended

if you will in a state of non-life. They clearly do not reside in the woman.s

body as of yet, and if kept in the current state, will never give breath. It

seems that the prochoicers would have to extend their definition of these being

a part of the woman.s body, to giving their potential to be such, meaning as

well. While they are not a part of the woman.s body yet, this is the intended

place for them to grow, and obviously they cannot grow inside of the father, at

least yet. The prolife, and paternal argument would be that these embryos are

clearly not a part of the woman.s body. They could be implanted in any woman,

not necessarily the mother. Therefore, the mother does not have the right to

abort the embryos. Furthermore, the male may have the right to claim custody for

implantation in another suitable candidate other than the mother if she is

unwilling. What we have in the case of Mary Davis and Junior Davis is a woman

fighting to have her own embryos implanted in her own uterus. Based on some of

the facts above however, does the father now have more right over the embryos,

since this process has not yet taken place. Obviously the situation here is very

complex. Unfortunately these types of situations could be prevented through

forethought. Couples undergoing these types of procedures clearly need to

anticipate all scenarios. Practitioners could easily fit issues into the

counseling phase, and even request to have documentation of such before these

procedures are done. A contract could cover

Внимание, отключите Adblock

Вы посетили наш сайт со включенным блокировщиком рекламы!
Ссылка для скачивания станет доступной сразу после отключения Adblock!

Скачать