Zur Kurzanzeige

dc.rights.licensehttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode.denone
dc.contributor.authorBernstein, Stephanie
dc.contributor.authorWiesemann, Claudia
dc.date.accessioned2018-11-01T14:49:59Z
dc.date.available2018-11-01T14:49:59Z
dc.date.issued2014
dc.identifier.issn2075-471Xnone
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.genderopen.de/25595/519
dc.description.abstractIn industrial societies, women increasingly postpone motherhood. While men do not fear a loss of fertility with age, women face the biological boundary of menopause. The freezing of unfertilized eggs can overcome this biological barrier. Due to technical improvements in vitrification, so-called “social freezing” (SF) for healthy women is likely to develop into clinical routine. Controversial ethical debates focus on the risks of the technique for mother and child, the scope of reproductive autonomy, and the medicalization of reproduction. Some criticize the use of the technique in healthy women in general, while others support a legally defined maximum age for women at the time of an embryo transfer after oocyte cryopreservation. Since this represents a serious encroachment on the reproductive autonomy of the affected women, the reasons for and against must be carefully examined. We analyze arguments for and against SF from a gendered ethical perspective. We show that the risk of the cryopreservation of oocytes for mother and future child is minimal and that the autonomy of the women involved is not compromised. The negative ethical evaluation of postponed motherhood is partly due to a biased approach highlighting only the medical risks for the female body without recognizing the potential positive effects for the women involved. In critical accounts, age is associated in an undifferentiated way with morbidity and psychological instability and is thus used in a discriminatory way. We come to the conclusion that age as a predictor of risk in the debate about SF is, from an ethical point of view, an empty concept based on gender stereotypes and discriminatory connotations of aging. A ban on postponing motherhood via SF is not justified.none
dc.language.isoengnone
dc.subjectMutterschaftnone
dc.subjectGendernone
dc.subjectEthiknone
dc.subjectReproduktionstechnologienone
dc.subjectAutonomienone
dc.subjectKörpernone
dc.subjectMedizinnone
dc.subject.ddc340 Rechtnone
dc.subject.ddc176 Sexual- und Reproduktionsethiknone
dc.titleShould Postponing Motherhood via “Social Freezing” Be Legally Banned? An Ethical Analysisnone
dc.typearticle
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.25595/513
dc.source.pageinfo282-300none
dc.type.versionpublishedVersionnone
dc.source.journalLawsnone
dc.source.issue2none
dc.source.volume3none
local.notes.internBY 3.0none
dc.identifier.pi10.3390/laws3020282none
local.typeZeitschriftenartikel


Dateien in dieser Publikation

Thumbnail

Diese Publikation erscheint in:

Zur Kurzanzeige