“Who could deny it to them?” Analysing Artificial Amnion and Placenta Technology as a selective reproductive technology
Hauptsächlicher Artikelinhalt
Abstract
Artificial Amnion and Placenta Technology (AAPT) is designed to ensure the survival of extremely premature infants in an environment outside the body. This technology will change our understanding of fetal health by introducing new medical and technical means of optimising it. As a result, the criteria for identifying health deviations – and consequently, for selection decisions – are also being redefined. At the same time, liberal eugenic ideas are gaining influence, seeking to legitimise selective reproductive technologies from a moralphilosophical perspective. This article examines and critiques methodological approaches to liberal eugenics and discusses the link between selective practices and AAPT development. It highlights the influence of technologies on
the development of needs and the ethical and political tensions that arise from possible limitations on therapy, the rights of pregnant people, and the expansion of selective practices through AAPT development. In order to discuss the extent to which AAPT could normalise and individualise selective and ableist practices, it is necessary to analyse the technology as a selective reproductive technology.
Keywords: ectogenesis/ectogestation, disability futures, selective reproductive technologies, reproductive justice, disability justice
Bibliography: Weigold, Stefanie: “Who could deny it to them?” Analysing Artificial Amnion and Placenta Technology as a selective reproductive technology, GENDER – Zeitschrift für Geschlecht, Kultur und Gesellschaft, 3-2025, pp. 135-149.
Artikel-Details
Literatur
Adkins, Victoria (2021). Impact of Ectogenesis on the Medicalisation of Pregnancy and Childbirth. Journal of Medical Ethics, 47(4), 239–243. https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2019-106004
Agar, Nicholas (2004). Liberal Eugenics: In Defence of Human Enhancement. Oxford: Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470775004
Baldus, Marion (2016). Selbstbestimmtes Entscheiden? Zugzwänge und Wirkmächte im Kontext pränataler Diagnostik. In Wolfgang Kröll & Walter Schaupp (eds.), Medizin – Macht – Zwang: Wie frei sind wir angesichts des medizinischen Fortschritts? (pp. 27–48). Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlag. https://doi.org/10.5771/9783845273587-27
Buchanan, Allen; Brock, Dan W.; Daniels, Norman & Wikler, Daniel (2000). From Chance to Choice: Genetics and Justice. Philosophy, 76(297), 472–475. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0031819101240406
De Bie, Felix R.; Kim, Sarah D.; Bose, Sourav K.; Nathanson, Pamela; Partridge, Emily A.; Flake, Alan W. & Feudtner, Chris (2023). Ethics Considerations Regarding Artificial Womb Technology for the Fetonate. The American Journal of Bioethics, 23(5), 67–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2022.2048738
Derbyshire, Stuart W. G. (2006). Can Fetuses Feel Pain? British Medical Journal, 332(7546), 909–912. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.332.7546.909
Duden, Barbara (1993). Disembodying Women: Perspectives on Pregnancy and the Unborn. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Durmowicz, Elizabeth L. (2023). FDA’s Regulatory Safeguards for Children Involved in Clinical Trials: Considerations for Artificial Womb Technologies. Date of access: 11 May 2025 at
https://www.fda.gov/media/172253/download?attachment.
Graumann, Sigrid (2011). Zulässigkeit später Schwangerschaftsabbrüche und Behandlungspflicht von zu früh und behindert geborenen Kindern – ein ethischer Widerspruch? Ethik in der Medizin, 23(2), 123–134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00481-010-0072-1
Hubig, Christoph (2006). Die Kunst des Möglichen I. Bielefeld: transcript. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783839404317
Hubig, Christoph; Huning, Alois & Ropohl, Günter (2013). Nachdenken über Technik: Die Klassiker der Technikphilosophie und neuere Entwicklungen (3., neu bearb. u. erw. Aufl.; Darmstädter Ausgabe). Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlag.
Hübner, Christian A. (2014). Pränataldiagnostik. Medizinische Genetik, 26(4), 372–373. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11825-014-0019-x
Kafer, Alison (2013). Feminist, Queer, Crip. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. https://doi.org/10.2979/6841.0
Kingma, Elselijn & Finn, Suki (2020). Neonatal Incubator or Artificial Womb? Distinguishing Ectogestation and Ectogenesis Using the Metaphysics of Pregnancy. Bioethics, 34(4), 354–363. https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12717
Kleemann, Jenny (2020). “Parents Can Look at Their Foetus in Real Time”: Are Artificial Wombs the Future? The Guardian, 27 June 2020.
Kozlov, Max (2023). Human Trials of Artificial Wombs Could Start Soon. Here’s What You Need to Know. Nature, 621(7979), 458–460. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-02901-1
Lee, Susan J.; Ralston, Henry J. Peter; Drey, Eleanor A.; Partridge, John Colin & Rosen, Mark A. (2005). Fetal Pain: A Systematic Multidisciplinary Review of the Evidence. Jama, 294(8), 947–954. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.294.8.947
Leontiev, Aleksei N. (1971). Bedürfnisse, Motive und Emotionen. Ein Vorlesungskonspekt [Needs, motives and emotions. A lecture summary]. Universitätsverlag Moskau. Date of access: 13 May 2025 at http://www.ich-sciences.de/media/texte/Leo156.pdf
Maskos, Rebecca (2010). Was heißt Ableism? Überlegungen zu Behinderung und bürgerlicher Gesellschaft. arranca!, 43, 30–33.
Nelson, Anna; Romanis, Elizabeth Chloe; Adkins, Victoria; Weis, Christina & Kuberska, Karolina (2024). Death and the Artificial Placenta. Journal of Law and the Biosciences, 11(2), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsae013
Nguyen, Thu T.; Criss, Shaniece; Kim, Melanie; De La Cruz, Monica M.; Thai, Nhung; Merchant, Junaid S.; Hswen, Yulin; Allen, Amani M.; Gee, Gilbert C. & Nguyen, Quynh C. (2023).
Racism During Pregnancy and Birthing: Experiences from Asian and Pacific Islander, Black, Latina, and Middle Eastern Women. Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities, 10(6), 3007–3017. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40615-022-01475-4
Partridge, Emily A.; Davey, Marcus G.; Hornick, Matthew A.; McGovern, Patrick E.; Mejaddam, Ali Y.; Vrecenak, Jesse D.; Mesas-Burgos, Carmen; Olive, Aliza; Caskey, Robert C.; Weiland, Theodore R.; Han, Jiancheng; Schupper, Alexander J.; Connelly, James T.; Dysart, Kevin C.; Rychik, Jack; Hedrick, Holly L.; Peranteau, William H. & Flake, Alan W. (2017).
An Extra-uterine System to Physiologically Support the Extreme Premature Lamb. Nature Communications, 8(1), 15112. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms15112
Pence, Gregory (2006). What’s so Good about Natural Motherhood? In Praise of Unnatural Gestation. In Scott Gelfand & John R. Shook (eds.), Ectogenesis: Artificial Womb Technology and the Future of Human Reproduction (pp. 77–88). Leiden: Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789401203456_009
ProFamilia (2017). Schwangerschaftsabbruch – Fakten und Hintergründe. ProFamilia Bundesverband. Date of access: 14 May 2025 at https://www.profamilia.de/themen/schwangerschaftsabbruch.
Rodger, Daniel; Colgrove, Nicholas & Blackshaw, Bruce P. (2021). Gestaticide: Killing the Subject of the Artificial Womb. Journal of Medical Ethics, 47, e53. https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2020-106708
Rodríguez-Garrido, Pia (2023). Ableist Obstetric Violence against Women with Disabilities: An Integrative Literature Review. Salud Colect, 19, e4676. http://doi.org/10.18294/sc.2023.4676
Romanis, Elizabeth Chloe (2018). Artificial Womb Technology and the Frontiers of Human Reproduction: Conceptual Differences and Potential Implications. Journal of Medical Ethics, 44(11), 751–755. http://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2018-104910
Romanis, Elizabeth Chloe (2019). Artificial Womb Technology and the Significance of Birth: Why Gestatelings are Not Newborns (or Fetuses). Journal of Medical Ethics, 45(11), 728–731. http://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2019-105723
Romanis, Elizabeth Chloe (2020). Artificial Womb Technology and Clinical Translation: Innovative Treatment or Medical Research? Bioethics, 34(4), 392–402. https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12701
Salden, Ska & Netzwerk Queere Schwangerschaften (2022). Queer und schwanger. Diskriminierungserfahrungen und Verbesserungsbedarfe in der geburtshilflichen Versorgung. Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung Policy Paper. Date of access: 22 May 2025 at https://www.gwi-boell.de/sites/default/files/2022-02/E-Paper%20Queer%20und%20schwanger%20Endf.pdf.
Savulescu, Julian (2005). New Breeds of Humans: The Moral Obligation to Enhance. Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 10(1), 36–39. http://doi.org/10.1016/s1472-6483(10)62202-x
Savulescu, Julian; Hemsley, Melanie; Newson, Ainsley & Foddy, Bennett (2006). Behavioural Genetics: Why Eugenic Selection is Preferable to Enhancement. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 23(2), 157–171. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5930.2006.00336.x
Savulescu, Julian & Kahane, Guy (2009). The Moral Obligation to Create Children with the Best Chance of the Best Life. Bioethics, 23(5), 274–290. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8519.2008.00687.x
Schneider, Reto U. (2023). Operation Fruchtwasser. Neue Zürcher Zeitung Folio: Fokus Wunschkind, 2. Mai 2023, 18–27.
Segers, Seppe & Romanis, Elizabeth Chloe (2022). Ethical, Translational, and Legal Issues Surrounding the Novel Adoption of Ectogestative Technologies. Risk Management and Healthcare Policy, 15, 2207–2220. http://doi.org/10.2147/rmhp.S358553
Sins Invalid (2019). Skin, Tooth, and Bone: The Basis of Movement is Our People – A Disability Justice Primer. Berkeley: Sins Invalid.
Sparrow, Robert (2011). Liberalism and Eugenics. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 89(3), 499–517.
Taylor, Luke (2021). Covid-19: Trial of Experimental “Covid Cure” is among Worst Medical Ethics Violations in Brazil’s History, Says Regulator. British Medical Journal, 375, n2819. http://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n2819
U.S. Food and Drug Administration (2023). Presentations for the September 19, 2023 Meeting of the Pediatric Advisory Committee. Date of access: 31 Oktober 2024 at https://www.fda.gov/advisory-committees/pediatric-advisory-committee/presentations-september-19-2023-meeting-pediatric-advisory-committee.
Usuda, Haruo; Saito, Masatoshi; Watanabe, Shimpei & Kemp, Matthew W. (2019). Reply. American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, 221(4), 369–370. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2019.06.036
Vedam, Saraswathi; Stoll, Kathrin; Tarasoff, Lesley; Phillips-Beck, Wanda; Lo, Winnie; MacDonald, Kate; Metellus, Ariane; Rost, Michael; Scott, Muriel; Hodge, Karen; Korchinski, Mo; Pijl, Marit; Alonso, Cristina; Clark, Esther; Tatum, Ali; Olson, Rachel; Xie, Kathy; Decker, Mary; Wenzel, Karolina & Hall, Wendy (2024). The RESPCCT Study: Community-led Development of a Person-centered Instrument to Measure Health Equity in Perinatal Services. Journal of Participatory Research Methods, 5(1). http://dx.doi.org/10.35844/001c.94399
Wajcman, Judy (2004). TechnoFeminism. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Watkins, Elizabeth Siegel (1998). On the Pill: A Social History of Oral Contraceptives, 1950–1970. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Wieser, Bernhard (2019). Digitale Gesundheit: Was ändert sich für den Gesundheitsbegriff? Österreichische Zeitschrift für Soziologie, 44(4), 427–449. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11614-019-00389-6
Wilkinson, Stephen (2010). Choosing Tomorrow’s Children: The Ethics of Selective Reproduction. Oxford: University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199273966.001.0001