親には最善の子どもを産む義務があるか : PGDをめぐる一論争の批判的考察  [in Japanese] Is there a parental duty to bear the best child possible? : A critical analysis of a bioethical controversy on PGD  [in Japanese]

Access this Article

Search this Article

Author(s)

Abstract

着床前診断の技術的な進歩は、日産婦の会告で許容されている以外の目的での利用の可能性を人々に拓いている。そこで、本論文では、将来的なPGDの応用可能性を見据え、その利用に関する倫理規範や行為指針について考察することを目的とし、文献調査に基づく理論的な研究を実施した。中でも、親には最善の子どもを産む義務があるのだという生殖における善行原則は、多くの賛否の議論を巻き起こしているため、この原則をめぐる欧米の論争を整理し、その意義と限界を分析した。その結果、生殖における善行原則が常に守ることが要求されるような絶対の義務であるか、それとも、ロスの一応の義務のような義務であるのかについて、原則の擁護者らと批判者らの間で解釈に対立があった。そこで、本論文では、この論争に一つの解決の糸口を見出すために、原則に従うべき「よい理由(good reason to do)」について考察を加え、従来の功利主義的な議論の限界を指摘し、徳倫理学的な観点からの補完が新たな理論的可能性を持つのではないか、ということを提言した。

In Japan, the guideline, which Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology established, has worked like a regulation of preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD). PGD's development, however, offers us many possible options for using it other than those utilizations recommended by Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology. The guideline prohibits the use of PGD such as sex selection, HLA matching and non-medical enhancement. On the other hand, borderless global society in these days makes it possible to use it for these undesired purposes in another country where there are no such regulations. What is more, some Japanese insist that PGD for those purposes must be available in Japan as well. Therefore the authors conduct a literature review and a critical analysis in order to take a closer look at ethical principles and norms to examine the use of PGD. The authors especially focus on "Principle of Procreative Beneficence", which Julian Savulescu, a philosopher/bioethicist, proposed first in 2001. According to the principle, parents who want their babies have a duty to bear the best child possible. This principle sparks active debates over the pros and cons in Western bioethical community. As a result of the review of preceding studies, the authors point out that they argue the pros and cons of the principle because it leaves its interpretation open; For instance they argue whether the principle requires an absolute duty or a prima facie duty like W. D. Ross proposed. In order to settle this conflict, the authors ask what a "good reason" is on the principle and point out that if the principle is based on utilitarianism, as it tends to be understood, it has some limitations. The authors conclude that a virtue ethical perspective proposed in this paper can complement the principle.

Journal

  • Bioethics

    Bioethics 23(1), 4-13, 2013

    Japan Association for Bioethics

Codes

  • NII Article ID (NAID)
    110009833360
  • Text Lang
    JPN
  • ISSN
    1343-4063
  • Data Source
    NII-ELS  J-STAGE 
Page Top