CIENCIASMEDICASNEWS: Women freeze eggs for stable families, not successful careers

domingo, 18 de septiembre de 2016

Women freeze eggs for stable families, not successful careers

Women freeze eggs for stable families, not successful careers

Bioedge

Women freeze eggs for stable families, not successful careers

by Xavier Symons | 17 Sep 2016 |

A new study of egg freezing in the UK suggests that most women are motivated by an anxiety to find the right partner to raise their children.

The study, conducted by sociologist Kylie Baldwin from De Montfort University in Leicester, showed that out of the 31 heterosexual UK women surveyed not one had frozen their eggs for career reasons. Instead, the participants said they were waiting to find a spouse who would be committed to raising a family.

"Many of the women I interviewed wanted to become mothers soon or had felt the desire to have a child for several years prior to freezing their eggs", Ms. Baldwin said. "However what had prevented them from becoming a mother was the lack of the right partner who they thought would be a good father".

The women in the survey were aged between 32 and 44.

The number of women freezing their eggs in the UK has steadily increased over the past 15 years. In 2001, 29 women underwent the procedure – a figure that rose to 816 in 2014. The average age of women to freeze eggs is 38, which later than health professionals recommend.

- See more at: http://www.bioedge.org/bioethics/women-freeze-eggs-for-stable-families-not-successful-careers/12000#sthash.1metX2Pj.dpuf

Bioedge

Today is a landmark, of sorts. It marks the first time that a child has been euthanised under contemporary euthanasia laws. Of course, euthanising infants is relatively common, but not children who are old enough to be asked if they really want to die. The death occurred last week in the Flemish-speaking part of Belgium, although it was announced today by Belgium's euthanasia supremo, Wim Distelmans. His words were very sober and solemn, as befits the occasion, but I suspect that he and his colleagues are quietly happy to see the boundaries of euthanasia spread even further.

Ultimately this is a triumph for out-and-out nihilism, not just Belgium's inventive euthanasia lobby. Nihilism is a philosophical fad which seems to catching on. Below we feature a report on three American bioethicists who argue the case for population control to fight climate change and a defense of infanticide by a Finnish bioethicist. I've also just discovered a new book by South African philosopher David Benatar. In it he argues that procreation is morally wrong because life's a bitch and then you die (I am over-simplifying, of course.) He concludes his book with these cheerful thoughts:

Every birth is a future death. Between the birth and the death there is bound to be plenty of unpleasantness ... Inflicting serious harm—or even the risk of it—on one person, without his or her consent, in order to benefit others, is presumptively wrong.

If I'm right, euthanising a child is not an terminus for Belgian euthanasia, but just a bus stop en route to pure nihilism. What its supporters are trying to eliminate is not just pain, but life itself. What do you think?