The Principle of Procreative Beneficence (Coursework Sample)
Final take home exam assignment
Worth: 25% of your final grade for this course.
Assigned: Tuesday, March 31, 2020
Due: Friday, April 10, 2020. Please submit your completed assignment via the course website,
no later than 11:30pm on Friday, April 10, 2020.
Please submit your exam via the course website, in Word .doc or .docx format (no .pdfs please).
Instructions, expectations and marking criteria:
From the list of questions provided below, please choose 3 of them to answer.
Each answer should be maximum 500 words in length. Your answers should be as accurate, clear and
detailed as possible. Answer the 3 chosen questions directly, and in full. No introduction or conclusion
The marker is primarily looking for evidence of deep engagement with and understanding of the
relevant course readings/content, thoughtfulness towards the revenant course topics, and critical
analysis and reflection (e.g. clear and reasonable objections to the authors, developing views of your
own supported by clear and explicit reasoning, plausible response to potential objection, etc.).
Please consult feedback provided on short critical analysis and argumentative essay assignments as an
indication of expectations.
Please include reference list/bibliography for all sources used. This does not count towards the word
count. It is not required that you use any resources other than the course readings/resources, but you
are welcome to if necessary.
The following criteria will be considered when marking your assignment:
1. The extent to which you demonstrate deep understanding of the relevant course material.
2. Your ingenuity in succinctly expressing and explaining complex ideas in a limited amount of
3. The clarity and convincingness with which you present your own points/argument.
4. This includes the quality of reasons you provide to support your claims.
5. The extent to which, you provide your own examples and/or ways of explaining the ideas in the
reading being summarised.
6. The quality and clarity of your written expression.
7. Correct and consistent use of written English Language—e.g., spelling, grammar, punctuation.
8. Correct and consistent use of style in formatting and other writing technicalities.
Final exam take home questions
What is “the principle of procreative beneficence”? Explain Savulescu’s argument in favour of “procreative beneficence”. Do you agree with Savulescu? Why or why not?
There has been a lot of discussions going on with respect to Julian Savulescu’s argument on procreative beneficence. The author alleges that it is a moral obligation for all parents to have a best child. That is, parents have an obligation of having a child that is best to their imaginations. Therefore, prospective parents should have a best child of the children they are to have. Although there has been a lot of heated debates to the issue, there has not been any argument that has succeeded in refuting this argument. The author proposed the principle after alleged possibility of parents having to choose between multiple embryos. Through vitro fertilisation, parents can select among embryos and thus can possibly select a best’s child. In addition, rise in technological advances has enabled the use of preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD which allows for detection of any defects as well as colour. Therefore, couples have tended to make use of the advances to ensure they reduce risks of diseases, as well as bad traits in their children. The technologies have thus been used in selection of gender as well as selection of non-medical traits.
Noting this, Savulescu’s thus argues that in most cases, existence of bad traits, like having diseases makes one not lead a best life. Therefore, parent have a reason to use available information to get the best. The author adds that parents have all information at their disposal and thus should select an embryo likely to live a best life. Thus, making use of the genes of intelligence and gender, the author argues that parent should select the best although he recognises that it could lead to social inequality. Therefore, well stated, the author calls on parents to select a child, who is their best selection, form the possible children they would have, ensuring that the child would lead a possibly good life, given the available information. The author this supports the argument since parents recognise existence of technological advances, and they are doing all this since they care for their children and it’s their duty to want the best for their kinds.
Therefore, I support the argument of Savulescu’s. This is because, all parent are rational human being. They naturally want the best for their children. Culturally, most parent have gender concerns with some wanting a mixed gender, while other have preference for males. Therefore, making use of technological advances, as well as moving with time is an important aspect. Information is vital in development, intelligence is a vital aspect of leading a good life in the current age. Therefore, the argument that parents should select a best’s child leads to life self-satisfaction on the side of the parent as they are concerned about the welfare of their child and a good life for the child. In addition, technological advance should be seen as tool to development, in this case, they lead to reduced risk of worse and increase reproductive choices and thus strengthening the principle.
Anderson suggests that commercial surrogacy contracts should not be “enforceable”. What does Anderson mean by this, and what is her argument for this position? Do you agree with Anderson? Why or why not?
Elizabeth recognises that in the recent past, there has been a rise in surrogacy which has been seen as a mean through which parent who could not have children previously can have. She describes commercial surrogacy as when a woman, is paid to bear a child and on delivery surrenders the child to another woman who becomes a sole owner thus terminating their parental rights. Therefore, leading to raised arguments that women productive capacity has been treated as a good that can traded while the market has not been well scoped. Therefore, the author regard commercial surrogacy as an activity that regards children as durables and women as baby factories. Consequently, it undermines the beauty of procreation and women reproductive capability.
Therefore, the author dictates that surrogacy should not be allowed under the natural laws of the land. She argues that surrogates should not give up children they have developed a bond with. Thus, alleges it should be illegal as it degrades women dignity, leads to children trafficking, and subjects women and children to a possibility of exploitation. The author argues that the beauty of being a woman is the ability to labour which should not be seen as production of any other commodity.
The author in her argument also recognises that commercial surrogacy is against human morals, and social justice. Although it has been supported, Elizabeth argues that it raises ethical issues and invades into the norms of good market practice. She alleges that treating women labour as a commodity, leads to degradation of women capability. In addition, children are also degraded, and their value diminishes as they are treated just like any other commodity. Looking at the children aspect, she argues that the transfers, interfere with trust and love that parent should have for their children. The norms actually change from trust to those of property rights. The surrogate, gives up her parental rights for monetary gain which contradicts the norms of parenthood and unconditional trust. This leads to loss of child value as it can be traded and a price tagged to it. Therefore, could as well be substituted. In addition, it lead to conditional love which should not be the case. Also, surrogacy leads to loss of freedom as the surrogate mother is denied parental right and any attachment is broken in whichever means. On the part of women, they would be exploited and the beauty of labour is undermined. Since they are seen as baby factories, the natural beauty of carrying the baby to labour is not acknowledged.
I support the argument of Elizabeth. This is on ground of human dignity and moral norms. Although technological advances have made things more realistic and applicable, humans are valuable pieces that cannot be at any instance compared to a good. They cannot be priced nor traded in a market place. In addition, morally, creation is Godly, and thus should be treated as so. Humans should not interfere with the reproductive process. In this regards, God chooses who becomes a mother and thus humans don’t need to exchange children at the market. In addition, the value of a child ca
- Hypothesis TestingDescription: The first step in hypothesis testing is formulating the null and alternative hypotheses from the research questions or objectives. These hypotheses are brief statements of two probable versions of the truth about the association between the predictor variable and the outcome in the population. The null...1 page/≈275 words| 3 Sources | APA | Mathematics & Economics | Coursework |
- The Concept of Language of Valuation in Ecological EconomicsDescription: The construction of the Manta-Manaus axis is an economic-based development that intends to increase the economic capacities of the regions it passes through. The planned transport corridor stretches from Ecuador in the the port of Manta to Manaus in Brazilian Amazonia....4 pages/≈1100 words| 3 Sources | APA | Mathematics & Economics | Coursework |
- Regression AnalysisDescription: Evidence suggests that the rate of student's enrollment in higher education institutions in the united states depends on various factors (Bailey & Dynarski, 2011). Some of the factors that have been suggested to influence the students' enrollment rate include the level of income, cost of tuition, amount ...2 pages/≈550 words| 8 Sources | APA | Mathematics & Economics | Coursework |