Reproductive Autonomy Rights and Genetic Disenhancement: Sidestepping the Argument from Backhanded Benefit

Abstract

John Robertson has famously argued that the right to reproductive autonomy is exceedingly broad in scope. That is, as long as a particular reproductive preference such as having a deaf child is "determinative" of the decision to reproduce then such preferences fall under the protective rubric of reproductive autonomy rights. Importantly, the deafness in question does not constitute a harm to the child thereby wrought since unless the child could be born deaf he or she would otherwise never have existed--his or her prospective parents would simply have chosen to abort. As such, for this child, being born deaf counts as a benefit, albeit of the "backhanded" variety, since the only other practical alternative is nonexistence. In what follows, I want to investigate this argument in detail. The target of my investigation will be the possible future use of gene therapy technology to "disenhance" one's offspring. I intend to show that the apparently unlimited right to reproductive autonomy, that is, the right to choose both the quantity and qualities of future offspring, entailed by the argument from backhanded benefit can in fact be "sidestepped" through considering what sorts of reproductive practices we as a society ought to allow.

They Chose … Poorly: A Novel Cause of Action to Discourage Detrimental Genetic Selection

“…In this paper we propose that a civil wrongful selection cause of action best provides the necessary disincentives to limit the use of PGD and other technologies to actively select for an injured child or otherwise 'disenhance' the child. 191 We justify the implementation of this cause of action, even in light of the many ethical concerns raised above as "it is wrong for parents to close off opportunities that would otherwise be available to the child only because they wish to impose their concept of culture, community or a good life on their child." 192 Nevertheless, as proposed, this cause of action can be developed such that the ethical concerns associated with similar causes of action are circumvented.…”

Precision Medicine and Advancing Genetic Technologies—Disability and Human Rights Perspectives

“…Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) involves screening embryos and is a technique used to identify genetic abnormalities in embryos created through in vitro fertilisation [24,25]. This technique, although offering significant benefits to reproductive medicine and enhancing reproductive autonomy (with greater choice and treatment plans) [26], produces concerns in deciding in what circumstances to pursue pregnancy. Use of these technologies arguably provokes ethical issues such as the value and dignity of all individuals, particularly persons with disabilities, as discussed below [27].…”

Parental Planning and New Reproductive Technologies

“…This is a 'crucial' distinction according to Wilkinson and one which he uses to reduce the force of some of the more problematic arguments against his preferred liberal-permissible regime (5). His core reasoning is based on familiar problems of non-identity (Parfit 1984;Harvey 2004;Hope and McMillan 2003;McMahan 2001). Assuming that the future child from the selected embryo A with characteristic X (which is, in some sense, bad) does not have a life that is so bad to be better-off dead, then they cannot complain that embryo B with characteristic Y (which is better than X) was not selected instead.…”