(in Polish) Procreative ethics 3800-PE23-S-OG

Knowledge
At the end of the course, the student has knowledge and understanding of:
- the role of ethics and bioethics in reproductive medicine, prenatal diagnosis and reprogenetics;
- multi- and interdisciplinary terminology used in procreative ethics;
- main issues and problems of procreative ethics, as well as main philosophical positions, axiological and normative approaches, and argumentation strategies used in procreative ethics;
- the importance of socio-cultural, legal, political and economic factors for the practice and development of reproductive medicine, prenatal diagnostics and reprogenetics.

Skills
At the end of the course, the student is able to:
- identify and analyze ethical problems in reproductive medicine, prenatal diagnostics and reprogenetics;
- critically examine views and arguments developed by other authors, including other students, or presented in the seminar readings;
- prepare a short written paper on the subject of the seminar;
- prepare and deliver oral presentation on the subject of the seminar.

Social Competences
At the end of the course, the student is able and ready to:
- critically evaluate the quality of received or acquired information;
- recognize the importance of ethics and bioethics as well as bioethical education for solving moral dilemmas in reproductive medicine, prenatal diagnostics and reprogenetics;
- engage in developing bioethics in general, and procreative ethics in particular, both in theory and practice;
- recognize ethical problems and challenges related to his or her own research and professional activity, to promote relevant ethical standards.

For PhD students

At the end of the course, the PhD student:
has knowledge and understanding of:
- methodology of scientific research in the field of procreative ethics
- ethical and philosophical aspects of fundamental dilemmas brought about by the advances in reproductive medicine

is able to:
- use knowledge from various fields in the humanities to identify, formulate and solve - in an innovative way - complex ethical problems brought about by the advances in reproductive medicine
- critically analize and evaluate results of scientific research, opinions of experts, and views of other scholars regarding ethical problems of modern reproductive technologies
- participate in or initiate scientific discussions and debates on procreative ethics

is able and ready to:
- critically evaluate one's own contribution to the development of procreative ethics; and to participate in discussions, formulate arguments, and express one’s own opinions in a manner respectful to others, their views, and to diversity of methods and approaches employed in the humanities
- recognize the priority of knowledge in solving scientific, theoretical, and practical problems in ethics procreative; and to respect standards of good research practice

The final grade will be based on:

(1) ATTENDANCE AND ACTIVITY: insightful participation in the seminar discussions and class group works, demonstrating student’s knowledge and understanding of terminology, problems, precepts and arguments discussed, her familiarity with the assigned reading as well as her analytical, argumentative and communicative skills – 40%;

(2) ORAL PRESENTATION of a seminar topic, freely selected from the provided list, demonstrating student’s knowledge and understanding of the topic, her analytical and argumentative skills as well as her ability to develop and deliver effective oral presentation in English – 30%;

(3) WRITTEN ASSIGNMENT on a seminar topic – 30%

Attendance will be monitored on weekly basis. Two (2) absences are allowed per semester. Each class absence beyond the two allowed lowers the final grade by one full number grade (e.g. from 5 to 4, or from 4,5 to 3,5).

A ‘5’ grade will require consistent insightful participation in seminar discussions, drawing upon readings and personal experiences, as well as excellent oral presentation and written work demonstrating students’ mastery of the cases, terminology, precepts and principles discussed.

Final grades will be assigned on the following percentages:
100-90% – 5,0; 89-85% – 4,5; 84-75% – 4,0; 74-70% – 3,5; 69-60% – 3,0; 59-0% – 2,0

For PhD students

The final grade will be based on:
(1) ATTENDANCE AND ACTIVITY - insightful participation in the seminar discussions and class group works, demonstrating student’s familiarity with the course readings, her knowledge and understanding of ethical and philosophical problems brought about by the advances in reproductive medicine, as well as her ability to discuss, formulate and express arguments in a manner respectful to others, their views, and to diversity of methods and approaches employed in the humanities – 50%
(2) ORAL PRESENTATION on a freely chosen seminar-related subject (accepted by the lecturer) - demonstrating student’s ability to critically evaluate results of scientific research, opinions of experts, and views of other scholars regarding the selected ethical problems in procreative ethics, and her ability to identify, formulate and solve - in an innovative way - complex ethical problems brought about by the relevant advances in reproductive medicine – 50%

Number of absences: 2

(1) ETHICS OF NEW REPRODUCTIVE TECHNOLOGIES
-- Nature of Human Procreation & New Reproductive Technologies
Required readings: O. O’Neill, ‘Reproductive autonomy’ and new technologies, in: Autonomy and Trust in Bioethics, Cambridge University Press, 2002: 49-70.
Optional readings: J. Robertson, The Presumptive Primacy of Procreative Freedom, in: Idem, Children of Choice, Princeton University Press 1994: 22-42; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith; Dignitas Personae: On Certain Bioethical Questions, Rome 2008, sec. 1-21.

-- Gamete Donation
Required readings: M. Lyndon Shanley, Collaboration and Commodification in Assisted Procreation: Reflections on an Open Market and Anonymous Donation in Human Sperm and Eggs, Law & Society Review 2002 36(2): 257-284.
Optional readings: D. Callahan, Bioethics and Fatherhood, in: B. Steinbock (ed.), Legal and Ethical Issues in Human Reproduction, Ashgate Publishing Company, Burlington MA 2002: 241-252; B. Steinbock, Payment for egg donation, The Mount Sinai Journal of Medicine 2004 71(4): 255-265.

-- Surrogate Motherhood
Required readings: L.M. Purdy, Surrogate Mothering: Exploitation or Empowerment?, in: H. Kuhse, P. Singer (ed.), Bioethics: An Anthology, 2nd Ed., Blackwell Publishing, Oxford 2006: 90-99; S. Dodds, Jones K., A Response to Purdy, in: H. Kuhse, P. Singer (ed.), Bioethics: An Anthology, 2nd Ed., Blackwell Publishing, Oxford 2006: 100-103.
Optional readings: D. Satz, Markets in Women’s Reproductive Labor, Philosophy & Public Affairs 1992 21(2): 107-131; B. Steinbock, Surrogate Motherhood as Prenatal Adoption, in: B. Steinbock (ed.), Legal and Ethical Issues in Human Reproduction, Ashgate Publishing Company, Burlington MA 2002: 263-269.

-- Redefining the Family
Required readings: R. Maklin, Artificial Means of Reproduction and Our Understanding of the Family, „The Hastings Center Report” 1991 (21)1: 5-11.
Optional readings: A. Charo, And Baby Makes Three – Or Four, Or Five, Or Six: Redefining the Family After the Reprotech Revolution, in: B. Steinbock (ed.), Legal and Ethical Issues in Human Reproduction, Ashgate Publishing Company, Burlington MA 2002: 215-237 [or] B. E.S. Robinson, Birds do it. Bees do it. So why not Single Women and Lesbians, Bioethics 1997, 11 (3-4): 217-227; D. Cutas, Postmenopausal Motherhood: immoral, illegal? A Case Study, Bioethics 2007 21(8): 458-63.

-- Reproductive Cloning
Required readings: M. Tooley, The Moral Status of the Cloning of Humans, in: H. Kuhse, P. Singer (ed.), Bioethics: An Anthology, 2nd Ed., Blackwell Publishing, Oxford 2006: 162-77; The President's Council on Bioethics, Human Cloning and Human Dignity: An Ethical Inquiry, Washington, D.C. 2002: Chapter 5: The Ethics of Cloning-to-Produce-Children.
Optional readings: D. Birnbacher, Human Cloning and Human Dignity, Reproductive BioMedicine Online 2005 (10)1/Suppl./: 50-55; Kass L., Why we Should Ban Human Cloning, Texas Review of Law & Politics 1999 (4)1: 41-50.

-- Status of Human Embryos
Required readings: P. Singer, K. Dawson, IVF Technology and the Argument from Potential, Philosophy and Public Affairs, 1988 17(2): 87-104.
Optional readings: B. Smith, B. Brogaard, Sixteen Days, Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 2003 (23)1: 45-78; B. Steinbock, The Morality of Killing Human Embryos, The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 2006 34 (1): 26-34.

(2) ETHICS OF PRENATAL TESTING & PRENATAL SELECTION
-- Ethics of Prenatal Testing and Genetic Counseling
Required Readings: R. Wachbroit, D. Wasserman, Patient Autonomy and Value-Neutrality in Nondirective Genetic Counseling, „Stanford Law & Policy Review" 1994-1995, 6: 103-121.
Optional Readings: A. Lippman, Prenatal Genetic Testing and Screening: Constructing Needs and Reinforcing Inequities [in:] Steinbock B. (ed.), Legal and Ethical Issues in Human Reproduction (The International Library of Medicine, Ethics and Law), Ashgate Publishing Company, Burlington MA 2002, pp. 299-334.

-- Prenatal Testing and Disability Rights
Required Readings: A. Asch, E. Parens, The Disability Rights Critique of Prenatal Genetic Testing: Reflections and Recommendations, in: E. Parens, A. Asch (eds.), Prenatal Testing and Disability Rights, Georgetown University Press, Washington 2000: 3-43.
Optional Readings: B. Steinbock, Disability, Prenatal Testing and Selective Abortion, in: E. Parens, A. Asch (eds.), Prenatal Testing and Disability Rights, Georgetown University Press, Washington 2000: 108-123; L. Gillam, Prenatal Diagnosis and Discrimination Against the Disabled, Journal of Medical Ethics 1999, 25:163-171.

-- Genetic Selection
Required Readings: J.A. Robertson, Genetic Selection of Offspring Characteristics, Boston University Law Review 1996, 76: 421-482.
Optional readings: D.C. Wertz, J.C. Fletcher, Fatal Knowledge? Prenatal Diagnosis and Sex Selection, The Hastings Center Report 1989 19(3): 21-27.; R. McDougall, Acting Parentally: an Argument Against Sex Selection, Journal of Medical Ethics 2005, 31: 601-605. [or] D. King, Why We Should not Permit Embryos to be Selected as Tissue Donors, in: H. Kuhse, P. Singer (eds), Bioethics: An Anthology, 2nd Ed., Blackwell Publishing, Oxford 2006: 158-161; S. Sheldon, S. Wilkinson, Should Selecting Saviour Siblings be Banned?, „Journal of Medical Ethics” 2004 (3): 533-537. [or] D.S. Davis, Genetic Dilemmas and the Child's Right to an Open Future, The Hastings Center Report” 1997 (27)2: 7-15; M. Spriggs, Lesbian Couple Create a Child who is Deaf Like Them, Journal of Medical Ethics 2002 (28): 283.

-- Procreative Responsibility
Required Readings: B. Steinbock, Wrongful Life and Procreative Decisions, in: M. Roberts, D. Wasserman (eds), Harming Future Persons. Ethics, Genetics and the Nonidentity Problem. Springer, Dordrecht 2009: 155-178.
Optional readings: R. Bennett, J. Harris, Are there Lives not Worth Living? When is it Morally Wrong to Reproduce?, w: D. Dickenson (ed.) Ethical Issues in Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Cambridge 2002: 321-335.

(3) ETHICS OF ABORTION
-- Abortion and Personhood
Required readings: M.A. Warren, On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion, in: T.A. Mappes and D. DeGrazia (eds.), Biomedical Ethics, New York: McGraw-Hill, 4th edition1996: 434-440.
Optional readings: M.B. Mahowald, Person, in: W.T. Reich (ed.) Encyclopedia of Bioethics, New York 1995, vol. IV: 1934-1939; J. Fletcher, Indicators of Humanhood: A Tentative Profile of Man, The Hastings Center Report 1972 5(2): 1-4.

-- Abortion and the Right to Bodily Integrity
Required readings: J.J. Thomson, A Defense of Abortion, Philosophy and Public Affairs 1971 (1): 47-66.
Optional readings: B. Baruch, Thompson on Abortion, Philosophy and Public Affairs 1972 1(3): 335-340.

-- Abortion and Interest Principle
Required readings: M. Tooley, Abortion and Infanticide, Philosophy and Public Affairs 1972 (2)1: 37-65.
-- Abortion and the FLO Argument & the Golden Rule
Required readings: D. Marquis, Why Abortion is Immoral?, The Journal of Philosophy 1989, 4: 183-202.
Optional readings: R.M. Hare, Abortion and the Golden Rule, Philosophy and Public Affairs 1975 (4)3: 201-222; G. Sher, Hare, Abortion, and the Golden Rule, Philosophy and Public Affairs 1977 (6)2:184-190.

Information on level of this course, year of study and semester when the course unit is delivered, types and amount of class hours - can be found in course structure diagrams of apropriate study programmes. This course is related to the following study programmes:

• Inter-faculty Studies in Bioinformatics and Systems Biology
• Bachelor's degree, first cycle programme, Computer Science
• Bachelor's degree, first cycle programme, Mathematics
• Master's degree, second cycle programme, Bioinformatics and Systems Biology
• Master's degree, second cycle programme, Computer Science
• Master's degree, second cycle programme, Mathematics

Additional information (registration calendar, class conductors, localization and schedules of classes), might be available in the USOSweb system:

• Description of 3800-PE23-S-OG in USOSweb