IVF should be made available to any woman who requests it, no matter what her marital status or gender preference. ” IVF, or In Vitro Fertilisation, is the process where a human egg is fertilized and cultured outside of the human body, and then the embryo is introduced into the uterus. It is a process that is used to treat infertility in women, and at the moment New South Wales has no legislation controlling access to IVF treatment. It’s anti discrimination act means that no-one can be denied treatment because of their marital status or gender preference. In my writing, my arguments are going to be against the statement that ” IVF should be made available to any woman who requests it, no matter what her marital status or gender preference.” These arguments include The Right’s of the Child, lack of resources, lifestyle choice, and costs to the government after the baby is born.
The first argument in my case is that of The Right’s of the Child. Dr. John Fleming, the director of the Southern Cross Bioethics Institute in Adelaide, says that fertility treatment should not be made available to single women or lesbian couples as it was against the Children’s Right’s treaty. This comes from the United Nations Convention on the Right’s of the Child which says a child has a right to a mother and a father. Under the convention, to which Australia was a signatory, children had a fundamental right to be cared for by both parents. No matter how much the parent or parents love the child and want to do for the child, they must still fall within the Right’s of the Child.
WWII was one of the wars that had the most devastating effects on peoples live in Europe. During five years citizens of the different countries suffered from this brutal war to which they were condemned by their government. Two of the most affected home fronts during this war, were Britain, and Germany. Women, children were the most affected, and by many they were the moral support for their ...
If a child only has a woman or two women for parents then they would not only be deprived of a father, but also a full identity. They would grow up without a fatherly figure, and would be constantly reminded of this, whether it be through questions from his friends, or questions from adults such as teacher and coaches. This would be a horrible wa to live. The next argument in my case is that of the lack of resources that makes In Vitro Fertilisation possible. There are hundreds of couples / people who are seeking IVF treatment, and around half of these people are either single mothers or lesbian couples. It appalls me that some single mothers and lesbian couples are receiving the treatment before married couples.
When a woman makes the lifestyle choice to become a single mother or a lesbian, they are also choosing to live a life without a man, which is therefore giving up the opportunity to have children. With this in mind, the first opportunities to have IVF treatment must go to married couples. If lesbian couples or single mothers desperately want to have children, they should first consider adopting a child. This would be a better option than having IVF treatment, as it would enable more married couples to be given the IVF treatment sooner. Another argument that is included in proving my case is that of the cost to the government and the taxpayers after a baby is born to a single mother or a lesbian couple.
Most single mothers that have a child which is created through the IVF program will be obviously very desperate for a child, and they will want to spend as much time as possible with the child. This means, as they are living alone and looking after their child, they will not be able work, and will be depending on benefits from the government for supporting parents. The case would be same with lesbian couples as well, that is depending on government benefits to raise their child. However married couples who had had a child through the IVF program would be raising their child as an average, heterosexual, married couple would. They would not apply for any government assistance and would raise their child unassisted.
"Counseling the Infertile Couple" Being a pastor of family ministries with three healthy children, it is hard for me to counsel other couples on infertility. I have also been on the other side of the table facing these infertility choices in my first marriage. There was a choice we faced regarding selective termination if we did conceive after hormone therapy. In a way, I am glad we did not ...
These arguments that have been put forward in proving my case have led to opposing the statement that ” IVF should be made available to any woman who requests it, no matter what her marital status or gender preference. All of the arguments used contribute to this statement, but the most important point is that of the Right’s of the Child. When deciding upon this statement, you must consider the child. They are the ones that will have to live with the constant reminder of having no father.
They are the ones that will be judged by other people, when it wasn’t even their choice. In conclusion, In Vitro Fertilisation should not be made available to any woman who requests it, no matter what her marital status or gender preference. The priority of the treatment must go to married couples. BIBLIOGRAPHY Fertility Enhancement and the Right to Have a Baby by Mary. B.
Maho wald. First published 1995. The Ethics of Reproductive Technology by Kenneth. D. Alper n. First published 1992.
Handbook of In Vitro Fertilisation by Alan. O. Trounson, David. K. Gardner. First published 1999.
Tough Choices: In Vitro Fertilisation and the Reproductive Technologies (Health, Society and Policy) by Patricia Stephenson, Marsden. G. Wagner. First published 1993. In Vitro Fertilisation in the 1990’s: Towards Medical, Social and Ethical Evaluation by Elizabeth Hilt, Dietmar Mirth. First Published 1998.
Sydney Morning Herald: Thursday August 3. web >.