David Heyd’s Generocentrism and the ‘(Pro)creation Epic’ (in Polish)

Main Article Content

Kazimierz Szewczyk

Abstract

In the first part of my paper, drawing on the works by David Heyd, I argue that, in the choices related to procreation, an autonomous decision of the woman (or of partners) involved should play the key role. In the relation between a healthcare professional, on the one hand, and a pregnant patient, or a patient who intends to become pregnant, on the other – the former is ethically obliged to provide proper help in the decision-making process that should nevertheless be founded on the ethical ideal of a morally good person. The decision should also be informed by the conception of a morally good person endorsed by the woman (or by partners). In the second part of my paper, I refer to the conception of the sanctity of human life, developed by Ronald Dworkin, to claim that, in a complex medical model, the tendency to equate the fetus with bodily organs should be curtailed as far as the relation between the pregnant woman and the fetus is concerned. The idea of the sanctity of life also serves as the ground on which what I call a ‘procreation epic’ is based. The suggested epic, viewed as a general philosophical framework for the healthcare and reproductive medicine policy, is considered relevant to democratic societies.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Szewczyk, Kazimierz. 2014. “David Heyd’s Generocentrism and the ‘(Pro)creation Epic’ (in Polish)”. Diametros, no. 42 (December):178-203. https://doi.org/10.13153/diam.42.2014.687.
Section
Special Topic - Cross sections of bioethics
Author Biography

Kazimierz Szewczyk, Medical University of Lodz

Kazimierz Szewczyk, professorMedical University of LodzPl-90-131 Łódźul. Lindleya 6kazimierz_szewczyk@onet.eu
Share |

References

Chańska [2009] – W. Chańska, Nieszczęsny dar życia. Filozofia i etyka jakości życia w medycynie współczesnej, Fundacja na rzecz Nauki Polskiej, Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego, Wrocław 2009.
View in Google Scholar

Chyrowicz [2006] – B. Chyrowicz, Problem argumentacji z odpowiedzialności za przyszłe pokolenia, [w:] Świadomość środowiska, W. Galewicz (red.), Universitas, Kraków 2006.
View in Google Scholar

Conrad [2007] – P. Conrad, The Medicalization of Society. Transformation of Human Condition into Treatable Disorders, The John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore 2007.
View in Google Scholar

Dworkin [1994] – R. Dworkin, Life’s Dominion. An Argument About Abortion, Euthanasia, and Individual Freedom, Vintage Books, New York 1994.
View in Google Scholar

Harris [1994] – J. Harris, Genethics. Moral Issues in the Creation of People – Book Reviews, „Mind” (4) 1994; dostępne na: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2346/ is_n410_v103/ai_15256435/?tag=mantle_skin;content.
View in Google Scholar

Health Council of the Netherlands [2009] – Health Council of the Netherlands, Care for Unborn Child, Centre for Ethics and Health, Hague 2009; dostępne na: http://www.gezondheidsraad.nl/sites/default/files/200901E.pdf.
View in Google Scholar

Heyd [1992] – D. Heyd, Genethics. Moral Issues in the Creation of People, University of California Press, Berkeley 1992; dostępne na: http://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft309nb1nd&brand=ucpress.
View in Google Scholar

Heyd [2003] – D. Heyd, Human Nature: An Oxymoron?, „Journal of Medicine and Philoso- phy” (2) 2003.
View in Google Scholar

Heyd [2009] – D. Heyd, The Intractability of the Nonidentity Problem, [w:] Harming Future Persons, M.A. Roberts, D.T. Wasserman (red.), „International Library of Ethics, Law, and the New Medicine” (1) 2009; dostępne na: https://publicportal.ekmd. huji.ac.il/bioethics/Published%20Articles/Non-Identity-article%20Heyd.pdf.
View in Google Scholar

Janvier, Leblanc, Barrington – A. Janvier, I. Leblanc, K.J. Barrington, The Best-Interests Standard Is Not Applied for Neonatal Resuscitation Decisions, „Pediatrics” (5) 2008; dostępne na: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/reprint/121/5/963.
View in Google Scholar

Kemp [1999] – P. Kemp, Final Report to the Commission on the Project „Basic Ethical Principles in Bioethics and Biolaw”, Copenhagen 1999; dostępne na: http://ec.europa.eu/ research/biosociety/pdf/final_rep_95_0207.pdf.
View in Google Scholar

Kuczewski [1999] – M.G. Kuczewski, When Your Healthcare Ethics Committee “Fails to Thrive”, „HEC Forum” (3) 1999.
View in Google Scholar

McCullough, Chervenak [2008] – L.B. McCullough, F.A. Chervenak, A Critical Analysis of the Concept and Discourse of “Unborn Child”, „American Journal of Bioethics” (7) 2008.
View in Google Scholar

Mattingly [1992] – S. Mattingly, The Maternal-Fetal Dyad: Exploring the Two-Patient Obstetric Model, „Hastings Center Report” (1) 1992; dostępne na: http://findarticles.com/ p/articles/mi_go2103/is_n1_v22/ai_n28611453/.
View in Google Scholar

Petersen [2001] – T.S. Petersen, Generocentrism: A Critical Discussion of David Heyd, „Philosophia” (1–4) 2001.
View in Google Scholar

Rawls [1998] – J. Rawls, Liberalizm polityczny, tłum. A. Romaniuk, PWN, Warszawa 1998.
View in Google Scholar

Różyńska [2008] – J. Różyńska, Od zygoty do osoby. Potencjalność, identyczność i przerywanie ciąży, słowo/obraz terytoria, Gdańsk 2008.
View in Google Scholar

Różyńska [2011] – J. Różyńska, Wartość (nie)istnienia, „Etyka” (44) 2011.
View in Google Scholar

Silverman [1981] – W.A. Silverman, Mismatched Attitudes About Neonatal Death, „Hastings Center Report” (6) 1981.
View in Google Scholar

Smolkin [1994] – D. Smolkin, Genethics. Moral Issues in the Creation of People – Review, „Ethics” (3) 1994.
View in Google Scholar

Soniewicka [2009] – M. Soniewicka, Regulacje prawne wobec nowoczesnych technik kontroli prokreacji: analiza roszczeń wrongful life, „Diametros” (19) 2009; dostępne na: http://www.diametros.iphils.uj.edu.pl/pdf/diam19_soniewicka.PDF.
View in Google Scholar

Strong [2010] – C. Strong, O wyrządzaniu szkody przez poczęcie: przegląd błędnych koncepcji i nowa analiza, tłum. W Galewicz, [w:] Początki ludzkiego życia, W. Galewicz (red.), Universitas, Kraków 2010.
View in Google Scholar

Szewczyk [2006] – K. Szewczyk, O Renè Dubosie, jego nowej medycynie hipokratesowej i teologii Ziemi, [w:] Świadomość środowiska, W. Galewicz (red.), Universitas, Kraków 2006.
View in Google Scholar

Szewczyk [2009] – K. Szewczyk, Bioetyka. Pacjent w systemie opieki zdrowotnej, PWN, Warszawa 2009.
View in Google Scholar

Szewczyk [2009b] – K. Szewczyk, Szpitalne komisje etyczne jako składnik systemu opieki zdrowotnej w krajach demokratycznych, Debata, Konflikt między opinią lekarza i wolą pacjenta – czy są nam potrzebne szpitalne komisje etyczne?; dostępne na: http://www.ptb.org.pl/pdf/szewczyk_konflikt_1.pdf.
View in Google Scholar

Szewczyk [2011] – K. Szewczyk, Czy płód jest pacjentem? Medyczne modele relacji kobieta brzemienna – dziecko nienarodzone, „Diametros” (31) 2012; dostępne na: http://www.diametros.iphils.uj.edu.pl/pdf/diam32szewczyk.PDF.
View in Google Scholar

Szewczyk [2013] – K. Szewczyk, Komisje etyczne i konsultanci etyczni, [w:] Bioetyka, J. Różyńska, W. Chańska (red.), Wolters Kluwer, Warszawa 2013.
View in Google Scholar

Wasserman [2005] – D.T. Wasserman, The Nonidentity Problem. Disability, and the Role Morality of Prospective Parents, „Ethics” (1) 2005.
View in Google Scholar

Wilson [1988] – E.O. Wilson, O naturze ludzkiej, tłum. B. Szacka, PIW, Warszawa 1988.
View in Google Scholar

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 > >>