Ethical Issues in Gestational Surrogacy

The introduction of contraceptive technologies hasresulted in the separation of sex and procreation. Theintroduction of new reproductive technologies (mainlyIVF and embryo transfer) has led not only to theseparation of procreation and sex, but also to there-definition of the terms mother and family.For the purpose of this essay, I will distinguishbetween:1. the genetic mother – the donor of the egg;2. the gestational mother – she who bears and gives birth to the baby;3. the social mother – the woman who raises the child.This essay will deal only with the form of gestationalsurrogacy in which the genetic parents intend to bethe social parents, and the surrogate mother has nogenetic relationship to the child she bears anddelivers. I will raise questions regarding medicalethical aspects of surrogacy and the obligation(s) ofthe physician(s) to the parties involved. I will arguethat the gestational surrogate is “a womb to rent,”that there is great similarity between gestationalcommercial surrogacy and organ transplant marketing.Furthermore, despite claims to freedom of choice andfree marketing, I will claim that gestationalsurrogacy is a form of prostitution and slavery,exploitation of the poor and needy by those who arebetter off. The right to be a parent, although notconstitutional, is intuitive and deeply rooted.However, the issue remains whether this rightoverrules all other rights, and at what price to theparties involved. I will finally raise the followingprovocative question to society: In the interim periodbetween today's limited technology and tomorrow'sextra-corporeal gestation technology (ectogenesis),should utilizing females in PVS (persistent vehetativestate) for gestational surrogacy be sociallyacceptable/permissible – provided they have leftpermission in writing?     

A Defense of the Feminist‐Vegetarian Connection

Kathryn Paxton George's recent publication, Animal, Vegetable, or Woman? (2000), is the culmination of more than a decade's work and encompasses standard and original arguments against the feminist‐vegetarian connection. This paper demonstrates that George's key arguments are deeply flawed, antithetical to basic feminist commitments, and beg the question against fundamental aspects of the debate. Those who do not accept the feminist‐vegetarian connection should rethink their position or offer a non‐question‐begging defense of it.     

‘And when you were a child?’: how therapists working with parents alongside individual child psychotherapy bring the past into their work

When a child is offered psychotherapy, it is common that regular meetings will be offered to the parents. However, there are debates in the literature about the degree to which such parent work should include a focus on the parents’ own childhood experiences. This study aimed to examine the way that those offering parent work as part of a study evaluating the treatment of adolescent depression dealt with this issue in their work with parents, both in the study and in routine clinical practice. Design: five therapists were interviewed on the subject of working with parents’ childhood experiences within parent work parallel to child psychotherapy. Data were analysed qualitatively, using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. Findings: participants described the need to consider the different parameters of this work to individual adult therapy; in addition, participants felt that it was necessary to negotiate permission to work on the parents’ childhood experiences. They also spoke of making use of insight into the repetition of the parents’ history, the analysis of parental projections and offering containment within the relationship; this varies from the ‘transference work’ of individual therapy and a different style of interpretation was described. Conclusions: there is a need to give more attention to the neglected field of working with parents alongside individual child psychotherapy, especially at a time when such work is under threat within many public services. There are particular technical issues related to work with parents’ own childhood histories that are different to how one might work in individual therapy with a parent.     

Taking care of one's own: justice and family caregiving

This paper asks whether adult children have aduty of justice to act as caregivers for theirfrail, elderly parents. I begin (Sections I.and II.) by locating the historical reasons whyrelationships within families were not thoughtto raise issues of justice. I argue that thesereasons are misguided. The paper next presentsspecific examples showing the relevance ofjustice to family relationships. I point outthat in the United States today, the burden ofcaregiving for dependent parents fallsdisproportionately on women (Sections III. andIV.). The paper goes on to use Rawls'theoretical tool of the veil of ignorance toargue that caring for parents should not belinked to a person's sex and more generally,that there is no duty of justice to assume therole of caregiver for dependent parents(Sections V.). Although justice does notprovide the moral foundations for parent care,I show that it nonetheless places importantlimits on the instinct to care. I concludethat the voice of justice should be audible,and is intrinsically present, withinfamilies.     

Slippery Slopes and Collapsing Taboos

A slippery slope argument is an argument to this twofold effect. First, that if a policy or practice P is permitted, then we lack the dialectical resources to demonstrate that a similar policy or practice P* is not permissible. Since P* is indeed not permissible, we should not endorse policy or practice P. At the heart of such arguments is the idea of dialectical impotence, the inability to stop the acceptance of apparently small deviations from a heretofore secure policy or practice from leading to apparently large and unacceptable deviations. Using examples of analogical arguments and sorites arguments I examine this phenomenon in the context of collapsing taboos.     

That Many of Us Should Not Parent

In liberal societies (where birth control is generally accepted and available), many people decide whether or not they wish to become parents. One key question in making this decision is, What kind of parent will I be? Parenting competence can be ranked from excellent to competent to poor. Cassidy argues that those who can foresee being poor parents, or even merely competent ones, should opt not to parent.     

Not being what you claim to be: impostors as sources of group threat

We examine the notion of impostors within groups, defined in this paper as people who make public claims to an identity while disguising their failure to fulfil key criteria for group membership. In Experiment 1, vegetarians showed heightened levels of negative affect toward vegetarians who ate meat occasionally compared to an authentic vegetarian. In contrast, non‐vegetarians saw the impostor to be marginally more likeable than the authentic vegetarian. In Experiments 2 and 3, participants evaluated only a vegetarian who ate meat. Evaluations of the target were influenced by group attachment, such that participants who identified strongly as vegetarians downgraded the target more strongly and experienced more negative affect than did moderate identifiers and non‐vegetarians. Participants were also sensitive to the size of the gulf between the target's claims for identity and their behaviour. Thus, targets who made public claims to being a vegetarian but ate meat were evaluated more negatively than were people who kept their claims for identity private (Experiment 2). Similarly, targets who tried to keep their deviant behaviour secret were evaluated more negatively than were people who openly admitted their deviant behaviour (Experiment 3). The reasons why impostors might threaten the integrity of group identities are discussed. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Parent–child interaction: Does parental language matter?

Although parental language and behaviour have been widely investigated, few studies have examined their unique and interactive contribution to the parent–child relationship. The current study explores how parental behaviour (sensitivity and non‐intrusiveness) and the use of parental language (exploring and control languages) correlate with parent–child dyadic mutuality. Specifically, we investigated the following questions: (1) ‘Is parental language associated with parent–child dyadic mutuality above and beyond parental behaviour?’ (2) ‘Does parental language moderate the links between parental behaviour and the parent–child dyadic mutuality?’ (3) ‘Do these differences vary between mothers and fathers?’ The sample included 65 children (M_age = 1.97 years, SD = 0.86) and their parents. We observed parental behaviour, parent–child dyadic mutuality, and the type of parental language used during videotaped in‐home observations. The results indicated that parental language and behaviours are distinct components of the parent–child interaction. Parents who used higher levels of exploring language showed higher levels of parent–child dyadic mutuality, even when accounting for parental behaviour. Use of controlling language, however, was not found to be related to the parent–child dyadic mutuality. Different moderation models were found for mothers and fathers. These results highlight the need to distinguish parental language and behaviour when assessing their contribution to the parent–child relationship.     

Scalar Properties, Binary Judgments

In the moral realm, our deontic judgments are usually (always?) binary. An act (or omission) is either morally forbidden or morally permissible. ¹ 1 I realize that I appear to be omitting the category of ‘morally required’ here. But that category does not affect my analysis in part because we can always substitute for a morally required act a morally forbidden omission to act. The question would then be whether the omission to act is permissible or forbidden. In any event, my focus is on deontic boundaries, and it is immaterial how many there are. Thus, I shall continue to speak of acts being morally forbidden or permissible.
Yet the determination of an act's deontic status frequently turns on the existence of properties that are matters of degree. In what follows I shall give several examples of binary moral judgments that turn on scalar properties, and I shall claim that these examples should puzzle us. How can the existence of a property to a specific degree demarcate a boundary between an act's being morally forbidden and its not being morally forbidden? Why aren't our moral judgments of acts scalar in the way that the properties on which those judgments are based are scalar, so that acts, like states of affairs, can be morally better or worse rather than right or wrong? I conceive of this inquiry as operating primarily within the realm of normative theory. Presumably it will give aid and comfort to consequentialists, who have no trouble mapping their binary categories onto scalar properties. For example, a straightforward act utilitarian, for whom one act out of all possible acts is morally required (and hence permissible) and all others morally forbidden, can, in theory at least, provide an answer to every one of the puzzles I raise. And, in theory, so can all other types of act and rule consequentialists. They will find nothing of interest here beyond embarrassment for their deontological adversaries. The deontologists, however, must meet the challenges of these puzzles. And for them, the puzzles may raise not just normative questions, but questions of moral epistemology and moral ontology. Just how do we know that the act consequentialist's way of, say, trading off lives against lives is wrong? For example, do we merely intuit that taking one innocent, uninvolved person's life to save two others is wrong? Can our method of reflective equilibrium work if we have no theory by which to rationalize our intuitions? And what things in the world make it true, if it is true, that one may not make the act consequentialist's tradeoff? I do not provide any answers to these questions any more than I provide answers to the normative ones. But they surely lurk in the background.     

Parent–Child Joint Reading in Traditional and Electronic Formats

There is little question that parent–child joint reading is related to a number of positive childhood outcomes, such as vocabulary acquisition and school success. With the growth of tablet computers, parents are now able to read to their children using different platforms. This study used a repeated-measures design with parents and their preschool-aged children to test the difference between reading interactions and child comprehension on two platforms: traditional books and electronic iPad books. Results indicated that in the electronic reading condition, parents used more talk about the book format and environment than in the traditional book condition, where they used more evaluative comments about content. Children comprehended significantly more in the traditional book condition than in the electronic book condition. Additional analyses suggested that this finding was related to the increase in distraction talk by parents in the electronic book condition. Results suggest that it is important to consider the specific content of parent–child reading interactions and the increased cognitive load these interactions can place on children, as parent questions about the book format and the environment were related to decreases in child comprehension.     

How Many Parents Should There Be in a Family?

In this article, I challenge the widespread presumption that a child should have exactly two parents. I consider the pros and cons of various numbers of parents for the people most directly affected – the children themselves and their parents. The number of parents, as well as the ratio of parents to children, may have an impact on what resources are available, what relationships can develop between parents and children, what level of conflict can be expected in the family, as well as the costs involved in parenting and the experience of parenting a child. Indirectly, there is also an effect on who will have the opportunity to be a parent, as well as on wider social issues that I mention but do not discuss. Having considered all these factors, I conclude that there is some reason to believe that three or more parents is usually better than one or two, especially if children are to have siblings, which is typically beneficial. However, these reasons are not strong enough to support a general presumption in favor of any particular number. We should therefore jettison the two-parent presumption and make different numbers of parents more socially accepted as well as legally possible.     

The role of child temperament on low‐income preschool children's relationships with their parents and teachers

The current study examined the associations between low‐income preschool children's temperament (reactive and regulatory) and their relationships with parents and teachers. In particular, we focused on the moderating role of regulatory temperament on reactive temperament in the prediction of closeness and conflict with parents and teachers. Two hundred ninety‐one children (M = 53.88 months, SD = 6.44 months), their parents, and teachers from 3 different preschools serving low‐income children in 2 midwestern cities in the United States participated. Parents reported on temperament and parent–child relationships, and teachers reported on teacher–child relationships. Hierarchical regression models using SAS PROC MIXED were employed to allow for nesting of children within classrooms. After controlling for child age, gender, ethnicity, and parent education, children's reactive temperament was negatively associated with parent–child closeness and positively associated with parent–child conflict and teacher–child conflict. Children's regulatory temperament was positively related to teacher–child closeness and negatively associated with teacher–child conflict. Regulatory temperament moderated the association between reactive temperament and teacher–child closeness. These findings suggest that although reactive temperament potentially undermines closeness in relationships with teachers, regulatory temperament can buffer the influence of reactive temperament on teacher–child closeness.

Highlights

• This study examined the association between children's temperament and their relationships with parents and teachers.
• Reactive temperament was positively associated with parent/teacher–child conflict and negatively associated with parent–child closeness. Regulatory temperament was a moderator for the association between reactive temperament and teacher–child closeness.
• Improving children's regulatory temperament may be helpful for children with the reactive temperament to have better social relationships with their teachers.

     

Beyond Ritalin: The importance of therapeutic work with parents and children diagnosed ADD/ADHD

It is estimated that as many as 5 million children in America are being medicated with psycho-stimulants for Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD) and/or Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). Parents frequently seek psychotherapy for their child up to one and a half years after medication has been tried due to a high degree of symptom recidivism. The parents should be engaged in the therapeutic work, if at all possible. An intricate web begins to unfold as the current parent-child relationship resonates with the parents' relationship with their own parents, siblings and childhood experiences. Working with the parents is essential if one is going to know anything about the cross-generational dynamics involved and if real and helpful change is going to occur. Conscious and unconscious parent—child dynamics of hyperactive behaviour in children are discussed. A clinical case illustration is described. Alternatives to medicating children are also described.     

The Morality of Daycare

An increasing number of parents are electing to use daycare to assist them with their parenting from infancy onward. Strikingly, there is scant discussion of whether or not such a practice is morally permissible. In this paper, I shall discuss three different arguments that I believe are implicitly thought to support the use of daycare. I shall argue that the current widespread use of daycare, particularly with respect to infant children, often involves arbitrarily subjugating the needs of children in favor of the desires of parents, and thus is often morally wrong. Finally, I consider a possible fourth argument; one that I believe stands a better chance of justifying the use of daycare, though in the final analysis I argue that it also fails to justify the current widespread use of daycare.     

The Effect of Behavioral Family Intervention on Knowledge of Effective Parenting Strategies

There is a paucity of research considering the effect of behavioral family intervention (BFI) on parenting knowledge and the relative importance of both knowledge and parent confidence in reducing parenting dysfunction and problematic child behavior is unclear. In this study ninety-one parents (44 mothers, 47 fathers) of children aged 2–10?years completed an evidence-based BFI and were assessed at pre and post-intervention on knowledge of effective parenting strategies, parenting confidence, parent dysfunction, and reported intensity of externalised child behavior. Results showed that at pre-intervention parents higher in education (N?=?57) demonstrated greater knowledge than those lower in education (N?=?34). Relative to baseline, parents in both groups significantly improved their knowledge and confidence, reduced their dysfunction and reported less externalised child behavior. Effect sizes for the latter two variables were similar for both groups, however for parents higher in education the effect for confidence was larger than knowledge. Change in level of dysfunction explained the largest amount of unique variance in change to externalised child behavior. Results suggest that for optimal outcomes for parenting and child behavior management more knowledgeable parents may benefit from interventions that focus on practice and consolidation of already learned skills in order to increase confidence whereas for less knowledgeable parents the teaching of new skills and strategies, alongside increasing confidence, are important.     

Loneliness,eating, and body mass index in parent–adolescent dyads from the Family Life,Activity, Sun,Health, and Eating study

Loneliness is a salient risk factor for obesity, emotional eating, and poor diet. Because adolescents and parents are embedded within a family unit, their experiences of loneliness may be associated with both their own and one another's behaviors. To examine the extent to which parent and child loneliness predict body mass index (BMI) and eating in parents and adolescents, an actor–partner interdependence model of loneliness, eating, and BMI in adolescent–parent dyads was analyzed. There were actor effects among adolescents such that greater loneliness was positively associated with emotional eating and BMI‐z, and there was an actor effect among parents such that higher loneliness was positively related to emotional eating. There was a partner effect among adolescents such that greater parental loneliness was positively associated with adolescent emotional eating, and there was a partner effect among parents such that higher adolescent loneliness was positively associated with parental emotional eating. There were several actor–partner effects for loneliness and junk food in dyads with boys. Findings highlight the importance of dyadic models of loneliness in adolescent–parent dyads.     

The Immorality of Having Children

This paper defends the Famine Relief Argument against Having Children, which goes as follows: conceiving and raising a child costs hundreds of thousands of dollars; that money would be far better spent on famine relief; therefore, conceiving and raising children is immoral. It is named after Peter Singer’s Famine Relief Argument because it might be a special case of Singer’s argument and because it exposes the main practical implication of Singer’s argument—namely, that we should not become parents. I answer five objections: that disaster would ensue if nobody had children; that having children cannot be wrong because it is so natural for human beings; that the argument demands too much of us; that my child might be a great benefactor to the world; and that we should raise our children frugally and give them the right values rather than not have them. Previous arguments against procreation have appealed either to a pessimism about human life, or to the environmental impact of overpopulation, or to the fact that we cannot obtain the consent of the non-existent. The argument proposed here appeals to the severe opportunity costs of parenting.     

Factors associated with parent labeling of children referred for conduct problems

Clinicians have suggested that in some cases normal children have been inappropriately labeled as deviant by their parents and taken to psychological clinics for treatment. Reasons given for such inappropriate labeling have included factors such as the parents' marital distress and intolerance of normal child behavior. This study provided an empirical examination of the appropriateness or inappropriateness of parent labeling of 5–12-year-old children referred by their parents for treatment of conduct problems. The definition of inappropriate labeling derived by the present investigators required that the relationship between the child's actual behavior and the parent's negative label be so imperfect as to raise questions about the justification for the label, and that some identifiable factors other than the child's behavior account for the negative label. Three parent factors evaluated for their contribution to the parent negative label were marital distress, parent negative behavior toward the child, and parent distress about child deviant behavior. The statistical model of hierarchical multiple regression permitted analysis of this definition. The association found between observed child deviant behavior and the parent negative label suggested that parents of this sample perceived their children reasonably accurately. The three parent factors were found to be negligibly related to the parent label. Therefore, the conditions for inappropriate labeling of the children by the parents of this sample were not met.     

Norms of criminal conviction

In this paper, I offer three different arguments against the view that knowledge is the epistemic norm governing criminal convictions in the Anglo-American system. The first two show that neither the truth of a juror's verdict nor the juror's belief in the defendant's guilt is necessary for voting to convict in an epistemically permissible way. Both arguments challenge the necessity dimension of the knowledge norm. I then show—by drawing on evidence that is admissible through exclusionary rules—that knowledge is also not sufficient for epistemically proper conviction. A central thesis operative in all of these arguments is that the sort of ideal epistemology underwriting the knowledge norm of conviction should be rejected and replaced with a non-ideal approach. I then defend an alternative, justificationist norm of criminal conviction that not only avoids the problems afflicting the knowledge account, but also takes seriously the important role that narratives play in criminal courts.     

“It Depends on What You Mean by ‘Disagree’”: Differences between Parent and Child Perceptions of Parent–Child Conflict

We examined a new structured interview of parent?Cchild conflict that assesses parent and child perceptions of behavioral conflict about daily life topics (e.g., doing chores, homework), and whether discrepancies exist on beliefs about these topics. In a sample of 100 parents and children ages 10 to 17?years (M?=?13.5?years, 52 males, 57?% African-American), informants could reliably distinguish between perceived behavioral conflicts and perceived discrepant beliefs about topics. These scores were also significantly related to questionnaire reports of parent?Cchild conflict. Parent and child questionnaire reports did not significantly differ, yet on the structured interview, parents reported significantly greater levels of perceived conflict and discrepant beliefs relative to child reports. Additionally, structured interview reports of conflict demonstrated incremental validity by relating to child self-reports of delinquent behaviors, when accounting for questionnaire conflict reports. The findings have implications for increasing understanding of the links between parent?Cchild conflict and psychosocial outcomes.