Dignity, marriage and embryo adoption: a look at Dignitas Personae

Should fertility clinics divest themselves of pornography?

Some commentators object to the way in which fertility clinics make pornography available to men as an aid to masturbation when those men produce sperm for evaluation, storage or IVF. These objections typically rely on claims that pornography is generally harmful to women, unnecessary and dissociates sexual acts from conception. In light of these objections, certain commentators want fertility clinics to divest themselves of pornography, but these objections to pornography are not morally convincing. In general, pornography can have psychological value to men masturbating 'on demand' in clinical contexts. Not all erotica must, either, work to the disadvantage of women in its means of production or social effects. Moreover, the sexuality expressed in masturbation has a value of its own, and conception apart from sexual intercourse is morally defensible on its own. Divestment from pornography would do little to constrain the putative harms of pornography because clinics consume only a fractional amount of the total amount of pornography available. The provision of pornography is a defensible clinical practice, even if it is not absolutely necessary to all men in producing a sperm sample important to their fertility or their interests in donating gametes.

Attitudes of fertile and infertile woman towards new reproductive technologies: a case study of Lithuania

BACKGROUND

This article analyzes several key issues in the debate: the acceptability of in vitro fertilization; regulation of assisted reproduction and the possibilities of reimbursement for assisted reproduction treatment in Lithuania.

METHOD

Two groups of respondents participated in the survey: fertile women and women with fertility disorders. 93 completed questionnaires from women with fertility problems and 146 from women with no fertility problems were analysed.

RESULTS

Fertile respondents more frequently perceived the embryo as a human being (Fertile Individuals - 68.5%; Infertile Individuals - 35.5%; p < 0.05) and more frequently maintained that assisted reproduction treatment should be only partly reimbursed (Fertile Individuals - 71.3%; Infertile Individuals - 39.8%; p < 0.05). Respondents with fertility disorders more frequently thought that artificial insemination procedure could also be applied to unmarried couples (Fertile Individuals - 51.4%; Infertile Individuals - 76.3%; p < 0.05), and more frequently agreed that there should be no age limit for artificial insemination procedures (Fertile Individuals - 36.3%; Infertile Individuals - 67.7%; p < 0.05). The majority of respondents in both groups (Fertile Individuals - 77.4%; Infertile Individuals - 82.8%; p < 0.05) believed that donation of reproductive cells should be regulated by law. Fertile respondents more frequently considered that strict legal regulation was necessary in case of the number of transferred embryos (Fertile Individuals - 69.2%; Infertile Individuals - 39.8%; p < 0.05) and freezing of embryos (Fertile Individuals - 69.9%; Infertile Individuals - 57.0%; p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Fertile respondents were statistically more likely to believe that the IVF procedure should be applied only to married couples or women who had a regular partner, the age limit should be defined and the psychological assessment of the couple's relationship and their readiness for the IVF procedure was necessary. In contrast, infertile couples were statistically more likely than fertile respondents to maintain that the IVF procedure should be fully reimbursed by the state. Fertile respondents were statistically more likely to be categorical with respect to the number of embryos and the freezing of embryos. Meanwhile there is a statistically significant difference in opinions of infertile respondents who were in favour of stricter regulation on donation of reproductive cells.