REPRODUCTIVE TECH: Matt Taylor
Reproductive technologies may, in the near future, present a possibility that has never existed before; namely, that two people of the same sex may be able to biologically procreate. The chromosomes in a sperm cell nucleus and ovum nucleus are essentially the same, except that ova carry only X chromosomes, whereas a sperm cell may carry either X or Y. In vitro techniques could exploit this similarity to allow same-sex couples to conceive a child, for example by transferring a sperm cell nucleus to an ovum, or by chemically inducing one parent's stem cells to differentiate into ova or sperm cells. The child's DNA would then be a genetic mixture of the two parents' DNA, just like a naturally conceived child; it might not even be possible to tell the difference, genetically, between naturally-conceived children and children conceived through such a procedure.
If this process is dangerous to the child's health, then it is obviously immoral. But assuming, for the moment, that the procedure is safe, what are the moral implications? Is it inherently immoral for a child to be conceived this way? Should the child's two genetic parents be his or her legal parents as well? Same-sex procreation could be banned by law, but if the law is broken then what becomes of the child so conceived? This question has been touched on, somewhat, in the debate over cloning, but I'm curious to see how people on both sides of the same-sex marriage issue respond to the scenario.
posted by Eve at
8:52 PM | link
Post a Comment
<< Home