Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36518707›Full record

ArticleThe Linacre quarterly2022

Made, Not Begotten: IVF and the Right to Life Under Conditions.

Susanne Kummer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Linacre quarterly, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Susanne KummerIMABE, Institut für Medizinische Anthropologie und Bioethik, Wien, Austria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6479-0724

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In a society in which the decoupling of sexuality and human reproduction has become normal, In vitro fertilization (IVF) has mutated into a kind of standard procedure. There is little awareness of the ethical ruptures that the mechanization of human reproduction causes. The basic ethical problem with extracorporeal fertilization in a test tube is that a child is not conceived through the personal union of a man and a woman, but is "produced" in a laboratory. In the context of human creation, this entails a series of ethical problems. The technique does not merely offer another possible option for action, but it leads to a fundamental change in the attitude towards human life as such. A look at the history of assisted reproductive technology (ART) since the 1970s reveals that ethical problems, eugenic visions as well as medical experiments on humans have been inherent to the method from the very beginning. Considering that eugenic thinking has been a driving force from the very beginning it astonishes that this delicate point has hardly been recognized and highlighted so far. Robert Edwards' (1925-2013) vision went far beyond the mere treatment of infertility through the use of IVF, which he saw as enabling the selection of so-called "unhealthy life." The article considers the risks of IVF and includes recent studies by physicians involved in reproductive medicine who are increasingly critical of their industry. Furthermore it emphasizes the core ethical question on human reproductive technology, contrasting the "ethics of procreation" with the "ethics of production." Summary: The article highlights historical aspects, considers the risks as well as the ethical questions on assisted reproductive technology.

Indexed as

assisted reproductive technologychristian anthropologyethicseugenics

Identifiers

PMID36518707
PMCPMC9743029

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.