Grand Canyon University
Ethical Decision Making in Healthcare
NRS-437-0500
Posthumous Reproduction Part III One of the most controversial topics is posthumous reproduction. Posthumous reproduction is the ability to conceive a child utilizing the sperm of a deceased donor (Hans, 2008). This raises numerous moral, ethical, and legal concerns. This paper will discuss the worldview and philosophy on posthumous assisted reproduction (PAR) of four different individuals: a healthcare colleague, hospital administrator, a friend, and a spiritual leader. Those interviewed were presented with the ethical dilemma on whether they agreed with the yellow group’s stance on supporting technology to create life posthumously with consent from the deceased spouse.
The Healthcare Colleague The first interview was with a registered nurse, who was not in favor of using technology for posthumous reproduction. However, the nurse suggested that certain situations could change her view. She mentioned that as long as there was a written consent prior to the procedure then she would be in favor of posthumous conception. Evidence of the deceased’s agreement to reproduce posthumously appears to be the most influencing factor in shaping attitudes towards both the appropriateness and morality of PCP (Hans, 2008). During the interview, the registered nurse felt that healthcare professionals should think about the child’s interest in the future. Many believe that posthumous conception is an empty form of fatherhood that should not be entertained (Tremellen and Savulescu, 2014). She exhibited deep concern for the child growing up without knowing the biological parent. Interestingly, she also was not in favor of receiving social security benefits for the child as this was for government/public benefits.
The Healthcare Administrator The second interview was with a perioperative health care administrator. She showed true compassion, and deep insight to the topic of posthumous reproduction. She mentioned that the technology allows those in critical life altering events to possibly extend their family posthumously, and bring something good out of a bad situation. As nurses, we are the best at making tough decisions and providing a nurturing response even when times are tough. Furthermore, she states that these technological advances were not available many years ago, and this can be a good thing for those with good intentions. Interestingly, she displayed concern over the Karen Caputo case of a mother of twins filing for social security benefits. She mentions that the justice system, both state and federal, has many flaws. Ultimately, she was in favor of both posthumous reproduction, and receiving benefits from social security.
The Neighbor/Friend When interviewing a friend of over 15 years, an explanation of what posthumous conception was needed. After the explanation, he was in favor of PAR as long as both partners’ main goal was to have a child together because of their love for each other and no other alternative. He did find it interesting how two people are willing to continue conception even after one partner passed away. When asked about the legal aspect, he thought it would be a good idea if both parties agreed and had it in writing. He believed that kids should also be included in their will that includes their personal savings, retirements, benefits, inheritance and everything they possess should all be given and divided equally for the sake of all these children including the ones born by PAR.
The Spiritual leader Finally, the last interview was with a chaplain at Portland Adventist Hospital. She stated that her Christian belief would strongly disagree with harvesting sperm on a deceased parent whether it was consented or not. She recited the book of Genesis 1:27-28, “love and procreation is a God-designed relationship and conception includes a wife and a husband who are physically intimate.” She said that the process of PAR is done after the death of one parent, which makes the widowed wife single again. When asked about her view on child conceived through PAR, she said that children are gifts and blessing from God and they are a heritage from their parents. Being conceived under these circumstances makes it hard if the child is to be raised by one parent. The chaplain showed deep concern for the child’s feelings if raised by one parent. Her opinion regarding a living parent filing for social security benefits was that it is morally wrong and that benefits should only cover children conceived before the death of the parent.
Similarities and Differences The interviews encompassed similar and various differences when asked about the ethical dilemma of posthumous reproduction. All questions varied amongst the authors of the paper, but ultimately allowed the authors to further explore the ethical dilemmas currently surrounding the issue of posthumous reproduction. Each answers posed similar responses of those that were in favor, and those that were not inclined to the rationale of the posthumous reproduction process. The majority of those interviewed displayed deep concern over the child’s possible upbringing. Three of the four interviews indicated that a child growing up with one parent could be a cause for concern. Although, if written consents were present, then the vast majority would be in favor of the process. In addition to these similarities, there were also observed differences in the responses. The chaplain used verses directly from the bible during the interview, and mentioned that a marriage is deemed dissolved once one partner dies. The chaplain’s morals, and values were strong. She ensured the process of posthumous reproduction is indeed morally wrong with absolutely no exceptions.
Group Stance The yellow group believes that posthumous conception should be allowed if there is written consent by the deceased person. Despite our own personal beliefs, not everyone will think and believe the same things. We witnessed during our interviews, that many people believe different things and some things can sway that believe while other remain strong. Those interviewed agreed that informed consent would provide allowance in order for posthumous conception to be morally and ethically right.
Conclusion
This topic is one that can be debated over and over again. Ultimately, it comes down to the decision the couple made before death. If there were consented documents, then a parent should be able to conceive a child. Many argue that by bringing a child into the world with only one parent is wrong and unfair. However, if that child is provided with love, a roof over their head, food and guidance, then who is to say that that is any different than having two parents. Posthumous conception is a scientific achievement and many people’s lives have been changed and improved from the tragic circumstances that came before. However, there will always be some that will not budge on their stance that posthumous conception is morally and ethically wrong.
References
Hans, J. (2008). Attitudes toward posthumous harvesting and reproduction. Death Studies, 32(9), 837-869 33p.
Proudfit, P. (2015, November 17). Posthumous reproduction [Personal interview].
Stanley, T. (2015, November 19). Posthumous reproduction [Personal interview].
Tremellen, K., & Savulescua, J. (2015). A discussion supporting presumed consent for posthumous sperm procurement and conception. Reproductive Biomedicine Online (Elsevier Science), 30(1), 6-13.doi:10.1016/j.rbmo.2014.10.001
