-
Views
-
Cite
Cite
Colin Farrelly, Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis, Reproductive Freedom, and Deliberative Democracy, The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy: A Forum for Bioethics and Philosophy of Medicine, Volume 34, Issue 2, April 2009, Pages 135–154, https://doi.org/10.1093/jmp/jhp016
- Share Icon Share
Abstract
In this paper I argue that the account of deliberative democracy advanced by Amy Gutmann and Dennis Thompson (1996, 2004) is a useful normative theory that can help enhance our deliberations about public policy in morally pluralistic societies. More specifically, I illustrate how the prescriptions of deliberative democracy can be applied to the issue of regulating non-medical uses of pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), such as gender selection. Deliberative democracy does not aim to win a philosophical debate among rival first-order theories, such as libertarianism, egalitarianism or feminism. Rather, it advances a second-order analysis that strives to help us determine what would constitute a reasonable balance between the conflicting fundamental values that arise in the context of regulating PGD. I outline a theoretical model (called the Reasonable Genetic Intervention Model) that brings these issues to the fore. Such a model incorporates the concern for both procedural and substantive principles; and it does so in way that takes provisionality seriously.