| dc.description.abstract | The thesis introduces and analyses arguments for and against the use, discard and genetic selection of human embryos in the context of the derivation of embryonic stem-cells and the preimplantation geneticdiagnosis during in vitro fertilization. The problem is approached from the moral viewpoint more specifically, from the practical ethics viewpoint. The methodology used is the reflective equilibrium, which consists in themutual adjustment between theoretical principles and intuitions (pre-theoretical judgments).The normative framework is inspired on Rawls theory of justice and on Beauchamp & Childress principlism. Besides introduction and conclusion, the text is composed by three chapters. The first of them discusses the moral situation of the embryo through the analysis of the main arguments for conceptionism (the claim that the embryo has the right to life since conception). The second chapter explores anti-selectionism (the claim that there is something morally wrong in genetic embryo selection) through the analysis of its main arguments. The third chapter analyses the Therapeutic Restriction (the claim that embryo selection must be permitted only to guarantee the health of the child). The conclusion of the first chapter is that the use and discard of embryo for research and reproduction is admissible, even if they are viable and created for this purpose, because neither ofthe reasons to confer the right to life to the embryo are convincing although they justify that there must be limits to embryo use. In the same way, the second chapter concludes that there is no decisive reasons against embryo selection in general, despite the grounds for caution. The last chapter presents the conclusion that the Therapeutic Restriction is inappropriate to distinguish which criteria of selection are morally acceptable, notwithstanding its advantages in public policy design. For instance, there are no decisive moral reasons against sex selection and selection by compatibility for donation, although they dont aim at the health of the child. | |
