Abstract
Since a high-profile case in 2002, the potential use of reproductive technology to select for rather than against a disability has attracted considerable bioethical and popular attention. The ethical wrongness and the likelihood of ‘choosing disability’ were considered severe enough to warrant the insertion of a section in the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 blocking assisted reproduction clinics from knowingly using gametes or embryos with severe genetic defects if alternatives exist. In this paper, I argue that this was a disproportionate response, and in tracing how it came about use this example to explore the symbolic function of the law in forming moral opinion, particularly in novel and ethically challenging areas, and the role of the media in conveying both the ‘message’ of the law to the public and the responses of stakeholders back to regulators.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call