Search

The article offers the author's opinion on various moral and ethical issues related to the use of genetic engineering for human reproduction. The author explains in detail his views on using artificial gametes for in-vitro reproduction and discusses concerns associated with it such as parenthood without consent, financial and moral parental responsibility, and destruction of the embryos. The works of scientists including John Harris on the issue are also mentioned.

Copyright of Veritas is the property of EDIPUCRS - Editora Universitaria da PUCRS and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This paper criticises John Harris's attempts to defend an account of a 'harmed condition' that can standindependently of intuitions about what is 'normal'. I argue that because Homo sapiens is a sexually dimorphic species, determining whether a particular individual is in a harmed condition or not will sometimes require making reference to the normal capacities of their sex. Consequently, Harris's account is unable to play the role he intends for it in debates about the ethics of human enhancement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Comments on the paper written by John Harris about the ethical issues in connection with in vitro fertilization. Recognition of Harris' exploration of the subject in the area of morality; Efforts to extend the analysis instead of offering a solution to the insights of Harris; Suggestion on the avoidance of dictating theories by chairmen to their committees; Absence of any discussion on the factual outline of the practice of in vitro fertilization in 1983; Agreement on the moral dilemma stemming from the fertilization techniques and the use of tissues from embryos.

The article discusses the impact of the biomedical revolution on sports activities. It states that this revolution, which includes the involvement of professional and amateur athletes in steroids and human growth hormone scandals, may harm the morality of sports. British bioethicist John Harris argues in his book that the use of performance enhancement drugs is not only ethically acceptable but possibly also morally obligatory. The author, however, suggests that the growing knowledge of people of biochemistry and genetics is a threat to the equality of the game.

This article profiles John Harris, a professor of bioethics at Britain's Manchester University. Harris believes that people should have the freedom to sell their kidneys, choose the gender of their children and control their reproduction, which makes him controversial. He believes that people don't have a right not to be upset by ideas. Overall, Harris believes that ethics does not have to mean restriction. Many of his colleagues, who disagree with his ideas, value him for his ability to argue a point of view that makes the medical community think more critically.