Surrogate motherhood, rights and duties: a reply to Campbell

H.V. McLachlan, J.K. Swales

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In a recent article in Health Care Analysis (Vol. 8, No. 1), Campbell misrepresents our specific arguments about commercial surrogate motherhood (C.S.M.) and our general philosophical and political views by saying or suggesting that we are 'Millsian' liberals and consequentialists. He gives too the false impression that we do not oppose, in principle, slavery and child purchase. Here our position on C.S.M. is re-expressed and elaborated upon in order to eliminate possible confusion. Our general ethical and philosophical framework is also outlined and shown to be other than Campbell says that it is. In particular, a moral philosophy that it is based on neither consequentialism nor Kantianism is presented. C.S.M., it is argued, is not child purchase. It is like it in some respects and unlike it in others. It is unlike it in the respects which, relative to the present discussion, matter.
LanguageEnglish
Pages101-107
Number of pages6
JournalHealth Care Analysis
Volume9
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2001

Fingerprint

motherhood
Slavery
Ethical Theory
purchase
slavery
Delivery of Health Care
moral philosophy
health care

Keywords

  • child purchase
  • commercial surrogate
  • motherhood
  • commodification
  • consequentialism
  • Kantianism

Cite this

@article{43abc2c9e7204624aea87b643c3e6a19,
title = "Surrogate motherhood, rights and duties: a reply to Campbell",
abstract = "In a recent article in Health Care Analysis (Vol. 8, No. 1), Campbell misrepresents our specific arguments about commercial surrogate motherhood (C.S.M.) and our general philosophical and political views by saying or suggesting that we are 'Millsian' liberals and consequentialists. He gives too the false impression that we do not oppose, in principle, slavery and child purchase. Here our position on C.S.M. is re-expressed and elaborated upon in order to eliminate possible confusion. Our general ethical and philosophical framework is also outlined and shown to be other than Campbell says that it is. In particular, a moral philosophy that it is based on neither consequentialism nor Kantianism is presented. C.S.M., it is argued, is not child purchase. It is like it in some respects and unlike it in others. It is unlike it in the respects which, relative to the present discussion, matter.",
keywords = "child purchase, commercial surrogate, motherhood, commodification, consequentialism, Kantianism",
author = "H.V. McLachlan and J.K. Swales",
year = "2001",
doi = "10.1023/A:1011359113000",
language = "English",
volume = "9",
pages = "101--107",
journal = "Health Care Analysis",
issn = "1065-3058",
number = "1",

}

Surrogate motherhood, rights and duties: a reply to Campbell. / McLachlan, H.V.; Swales, J.K.

In: Health Care Analysis, Vol. 9, No. 1, 2001, p. 101-107.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Surrogate motherhood, rights and duties: a reply to Campbell

AU - McLachlan, H.V.

AU - Swales, J.K.

PY - 2001

Y1 - 2001

N2 - In a recent article in Health Care Analysis (Vol. 8, No. 1), Campbell misrepresents our specific arguments about commercial surrogate motherhood (C.S.M.) and our general philosophical and political views by saying or suggesting that we are 'Millsian' liberals and consequentialists. He gives too the false impression that we do not oppose, in principle, slavery and child purchase. Here our position on C.S.M. is re-expressed and elaborated upon in order to eliminate possible confusion. Our general ethical and philosophical framework is also outlined and shown to be other than Campbell says that it is. In particular, a moral philosophy that it is based on neither consequentialism nor Kantianism is presented. C.S.M., it is argued, is not child purchase. It is like it in some respects and unlike it in others. It is unlike it in the respects which, relative to the present discussion, matter.

AB - In a recent article in Health Care Analysis (Vol. 8, No. 1), Campbell misrepresents our specific arguments about commercial surrogate motherhood (C.S.M.) and our general philosophical and political views by saying or suggesting that we are 'Millsian' liberals and consequentialists. He gives too the false impression that we do not oppose, in principle, slavery and child purchase. Here our position on C.S.M. is re-expressed and elaborated upon in order to eliminate possible confusion. Our general ethical and philosophical framework is also outlined and shown to be other than Campbell says that it is. In particular, a moral philosophy that it is based on neither consequentialism nor Kantianism is presented. C.S.M., it is argued, is not child purchase. It is like it in some respects and unlike it in others. It is unlike it in the respects which, relative to the present discussion, matter.

KW - child purchase

KW - commercial surrogate

KW - motherhood

KW - commodification

KW - consequentialism

KW - Kantianism

UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1011359113000

U2 - 10.1023/A:1011359113000

DO - 10.1023/A:1011359113000

M3 - Article

VL - 9

SP - 101

EP - 107

JO - Health Care Analysis

T2 - Health Care Analysis

JF - Health Care Analysis

SN - 1065-3058

IS - 1

ER -